Google, de volgende ‘die advertentieruimte verkocht aan Putin zelf……’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Op BNR gistermiddag (rond 16.38 u.) het bericht dat na Facebook, nu ook Google heeft toegegeven, advertentieruimte te hebben verkocht aan de Russen, u weet wel het Russische ‘fake kantoor’ dat in directe verbinding zou staan met Putin zelf……….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Ofwel: Google is onder druk gezet door één of meerdere van de geheime diensten in de VS en probeert haar hachje te redden met zo’n flut bewering, of Google denkt veel klanten kwijt te raken als ze niet mee janken in het koor van democraten die het niet kunnen verkroppen dat Hillary Clinton het, in een door haar vals geleidde verkiezingscampagne, heeft verloren van het beest Trump……

Het gaat hier, als eerder met Facebook (houdt u vast) om het enorme bedrag van $ 100,000 dollar……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Het totale bedrag dat aan deze verkiezingen in de VS is uitgegeven, bedraagt naar schattingen 5,8 miljard dollar……. Is er dan werkelijk nog één imbeciel die denkt dat beambten van Putin niet weten om welke kapitalen het gaat in de VS presidentsverkiezingen en werkelijk denken daarin het verschil te kunnen maken met $ 100,000 dollar, of van mijn part met $ 10 miljoen dollar aan advertenties? Als Putin zelf zo dom zou zijn, waren we al in een derde wereldoorlog beland………… Iets dat met een figuur als Trump of Hillary Clinton op de plek van Putin wel was gebeurd……….

Nogmaals: als er één ‘land’ is dat: -willekeurig elk ander land hackt, -zich bemoeit met verkiezingen in andere landen, -landen middels economische en/of militaire druk tot zaken dwingt, -opstanden en coups organiseert in andere landen, -zelfs de ene illegale oorlog na de andere begint, is het de VS wel!! En deze walgelijke terreur wordt gesteund door de westerse regeringen en samenwerking met de reguliere westerse (massa-) media………

Zoals intussen algemeen bekend mag worden geacht, werkt ook onze regering mee aan deze terreur (die ook nog eens vluchtelingenstromen opgang brengt en terreur op de EU straten heeft uitgelokt)…….. Sterker nog ook u en ik doen daar indirect aan mee, daar wij zelfs extra bloeden voor de gevolgen van de illegale oorlogen* die de VS in het Midden-Oosten, Afghanistan en Afrika voert en voor het meedoen van Nederland aan die oorlogen, oorlogen die gekenmerkt worden door enorme oorlogsmisdaden (alleen het beginnen van een illegale oorlog is al een gigantische oorlogsmisdaad…)…….

Maar nee, Rusland ‘is de kwaaie pier…………’

* Niet alleen de kosten voor de vluchtelingenstromen en de terreur in EU landen, maar ook onze privacy wordt opgeofferd in ‘de strijd tegen terreur’, terwijl na elke gepleegde aanslag blijkt, dat de geheime diensten (en vaak ook de politie) de dader(s) al in het oog hielden (althans dat was de bedoeling….)……

Zie
ook: 
Google manipuleerde VS presidentsverkiezingen van 2016 en censureert niet alleen linkse/alternatieve sociale media


       en:  ‘Publicly
Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016
Election


       en:
Democraten
VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty
Dossier’ on Trump


       en:
Russia
Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream
Media


       en:
CIA
chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle
mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
ha!


       en:
Russische
‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >>
Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence


 
     
en:
Rusland
krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en
Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

        en:
Russiagate,
of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis
met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..
‘ 


       en: ‘Pompeo (CIA opperhoofd met koperen fluit): heeft alle aanwijzingen dat Rusland de midterm verkiezingen zal manipuleren……

New York Times met schaamteloze anti-Russische propaganda en ‘fake news….’

Robert Parry legt op Consortium News uit, in een artikel overgenomen door Anti-Media, waar goed journalistiek werk o.a. aan moet voldoen: een teken dat een artikel het product is van slordige of oneerlijke journalistiek, kan gezien worden als de kern van het verhaal als feit wordt neergezet, terwijl dit niet bewezen is, of onderdeel is van een serieuze discussie. Veelal wordt zo’n artikel het fundament voor andere (niet bewezen) claims, waarmee een verhaal ‘wordt gebouwd’, dat gefundeerd is op los zand….

Dergelijke journalistiek zou niet in de reguliere media terecht mogen komen, echter tegenwoordig is het tegendeel vaak de praktijk, zoals we zien in de reguliere westerse (massa-) media. Neem de berichtgeving over de illegale oorlogen van de VS tegen Afghanistan, Irak, Libië en nu weer tegen Syrië. ‘Voldongen’ leugens werden en worden als feiten en de enige waarheid neergezet…….

Hetzelfde geldt voor alle belachelijke claims, dat Rusland de VS verkiezingen zou hebben gemanipuleerd middels hacken en het publiceren van artikelen door o.a. Sputnik en Russia Today (RT). Daarbij worden  naast een ‘tsunami’ aan berichten op Facebook en Twitter, nu ook advertenties genoemd, die werden geplaatst op Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Voor al deze zogenaamde feiten, is geen nanometer bewijs, maar ze worden desondanks door diezelfde reguliere media en het merendeel van de westerse politici als de enige waarheid gezien, dit terwijl het overtuigende bewijs van het tegendeel terzijde wordt geschoven………

Parry schrijft over een artikel dat afgelopen vrijdag over 3 pagina’s werd geplaatst in the New York Times (NYT). Daarin wordt betoogt dat Rusland ‘een leger van nep-Amerikanen’ heeft gebruikt om de VS verkiezingen te beïnvloeden……. Of wat dacht u van: ‘met een vloed aan Facebook en Twitterberichten hebben bedriegers haat en verdeeldheid gezaaid in de VS…..’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Ja, ze durven wel hè, terwijl die zogenaamde Amerikanen elkaar al een paar eeuwen de strot kunnen afbijten!! (neem alleen al de nog steeds bestaande grove discriminatie van gekleurden in de VS….)

Facebook weigert intussen nog steeds om de advertenties vrij te geven, die volgens haar door de Russische overheid werden geplaatst……. Kortom Facebook beschuldigt een land van uiterst grove handelingen en stelt daarna vrolijk dat men maar moet geloven op de blauwe ogen van de redactie……..

Lees het volgende uitstekende artikel van Parry en zegt het voort!

Has
the New York Times Gone Completely Insane?

September
16, 2017 at 11:31 am

Written
by 
Robert
Parry

Crossing
a line from recklessness into madness, The New York Times published a
front-page opus suggesting that Russia was behind social media
criticism of Hillary Clinton, reports Robert Parry.

(CN) For
those of us who have taught journalism or worked as editors, a sign
that an article is the product of sloppy or dishonest journalism is
that a key point will be declared as flat fact when it is unproven or
a point in serious dispute – and it then becomes the foundation for
other claims, building a story like a high-rise constructed on sand.

This
use of speculation as fact is something to guard against particularly
in the work of inexperienced or opinionated reporters. But what
happens when this sort of unprofessional work tops page one of The
New York Times one day as a major “investigative” article and
reemerges the next day in even more strident form as a major Times
editorial? Are we dealing then with an inept journalist who got
carried away with his thesis or are we facing institutional
corruption or even a collective madness driven by ideological fervor?

What
is stunning about the 
lede
story
 in
last Friday’s print edition of The New York Times is that it offers
no real evidence to support its provocative claim that – as the
headline states – “To Sway Vote, Russia Used Army of Fake
Americans” or its subhead: “Flooding Twitter and Facebook,
Impostors Helped Fuel Anger in Polarized U.S.”

In
the old days, this wildly speculative article, which spills over
three pages, would have earned an F in a J-school class or gotten a
rookie reporter a stern rebuke from a senior editor. But now such
unprofessionalism is highlighted by The New York Times, which boasts
that it is the standard-setter of American journalism, the nation’s
“newspaper of record.”

In
this case, it allows reporter Scott Shane to introduce his thesis by
citing some Internet accounts that apparently used fake identities,
but he ties none of them to the Russian government. Acting like he
has minimal familiarity with the Internet – yes, a lot of people do
use fake identities – Shane builds his case on the assumption that
accounts that cited references to purloined Democratic emails must be
somehow from an agent or a bot connected to the Kremlin.

For
instance, Shane cites the fake identity of “Melvin Redick,” who
suggested on June 8, 2016, that people visit DCLeaks which, a few
days earlier, had posted some emails from prominent Americans, which
Shane states as fact – not allegation – were “stolen … by
Russian hackers.”

Shane
then adds, also as flat fact, that “The site’s phony promoters
were in the vanguard of a cyberarmy of counterfeit Facebook and
Twitter accounts, a legion of Russian-controlled impostors whose
operations are still being unraveled.”

The
Times’ Version

In
other words, Shane tells us, “The Russian information attack on the
election did not stop with the hacking and leaking of Democratic
emails or the fire hose of stories, true, false and in between, that
battered Mrs. Clinton on Russian outlets like RT and Sputnik. Far
less splashy, and far more difficult to trace, was Russia’s
experimentation on Facebook and Twitter, the American companies that
essentially invented the tools of social media and, in this case, did
not stop them from being turned into engines of deception and
propaganda.”

Besides
the obvious point that very few Americans watch RT and/or Sputnik and
that Shane offers no details about the alleged falsity of those “fire
hose of stories,” let’s examine how his accusations are backed
up:

An
investigation by The New York Times, and new research from the
cybersecurity firm FireEye, reveals some of the mechanisms by which
suspected Russian operators used Twitter and Facebook to spread
anti-Clinton messages and promote the hacked material they had
leaked. On Wednesday, Facebook officials disclosed that they had shut
down several hundred accounts that they believe were created by a
Russian company linked to the Kremlin and used to buy $100,000 in ads
pushing divisive issues during and after the American election
campaign. On Twitter, as on Facebook, Russian fingerprints are on
hundreds or thousands of fake accounts that regularly posted
anti-Clinton messages.”

Note
the weasel words: “suspected”; “believe”; ‘linked”;
“fingerprints.” When you see such equivocation, it means that
these folks – both the Times and FireEye – don’t have hard
evidence; they are speculating.

And
it’s worth noting that the supposed “army of fake Americans”
may amount to hundreds out of Facebook’s 
two
billion or so monthly users
 and
the $100,000 in ads compare to the company’s annual ad revenue
of 
around
$27 billion
.
(I’d do the math but my calculator doesn’t compute such tiny
percentages.)

So,
this “army” is really not an “army” and we don’t even know
that it is “Russian.” But some readers might say that surely we
know that the Kremlin did mastermind the hacking of Democratic
emails!

That
claim is supported by the Jan. 6 “intelligence community
assessment” that was the work of what President Obama’s Director
of National Intelligence James Clapper called “hand-picked”
analysts from three agencies – the Central Intelligence Agency,
National Security Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation. But, as
any intelligence expert will tell you, if you hand-pick the analysts,
you are hand-picking the conclusions.

Agreeing
with Putin

But
some still might protest that the Jan. 6 report surely presented
convincing evidence of this serious charge about Russian President
Vladimir Putin personally intervening in the U.S. election to help
put Donald Trump in the White House. Well, as it turns out, not so
much, and if you don’t believe me, we can call to the witness stand
none other than New York Times reporter Scott Shane.

Shane wrote at
the time: “What is missing from the [the Jan. 6] public report is
what many Americans most eagerly anticipated: hard evidence to back
up the agencies’ claims that the Russian government engineered the
election attack. … Instead, the message from the agencies
essentially amounts to ‘trust us.’”

So,
even Scott Shane, the author of last Friday’s opus, recognized the
lack of “hard evidence” to prove that the Russian government was
behind the release of the Democratic emails, a claim that both Putin
and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who published a trove of the
emails, have denied. While it is surely possible that Putin and
Assange are lying or don’t know the facts, you might think that
their denials would be relevant to this lengthy investigative
article, which also could have benefited from some mention of Shane’s
own skepticism of last January, but, hey, you don’t want
inconvenient details to mess up a cool narrative.

Yet,
if you struggle all the way to the end of last Friday’s article,
you do find out how flimsy the Times’ case actually is. How, for
instance, do we know that “Melvin Redick” is a Russian impostor
posing as an American? The proof, according to Shane, is that “His
posts were never personal, just news articles reflecting a
pro-Russian worldview.”

As
it turns out, the Times now operates with what must be called a
neo-McCarthyistic approach for identifying people as Kremlin stooges,
i.e., anyone who doubts the truthfulness of the State Department’s
narratives on Syria, Ukraine and other international topics.

Unreliable
Source

In
the article’s last section, Shane acknowledges as much in citing
one of his experts, “Andrew Weisburd, an Illinois online researcher
who has written frequently about Russian influence on social media.”
Shane quotes Weisburd as admitting how hard it is to differentiate
Americans who just might oppose Hillary Clinton because they didn’t
think she’d make a good president from supposed Russian operatives:
“Trying to disaggregate the two was difficult, to put it mildly.”

According
to Shane, “Mr. Weisburd said he had labeled some Twitter accounts
‘Kremlin trolls’ based simply on their pro-Russia tweets and with
no proof of Russian government ties. The Times contacted several such
users, who insisted that they had come by their anti-American,
pro-Russian views honestly, without payment or instructions from
Moscow.”

One
of Weisburd’s “Kremlin trolls” turned out to be 66-year-old
Marilyn Justice who lives in Nova Scotia and who 
somehow
reached the conclusion
 that
“Hillary’s a warmonger.” During the 2014 Winter Olympics in
Sochi, Russia, she reached another conclusion: that U.S. commentators
were exhibiting a snide anti-Russia bias perhaps because they indeed
were exhibiting a snide anti-Russia bias.

Shane
tracked down another “Kremlin troll,” 48-year-old Marcel Sardo, a
web producer in Zurich, Switzerland, who dares to dispute the West’s
groupthink that Russia was responsible for shooting down Malaysia
Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine on July 17, 2014, and the State
Department’s claims that the Syrian government used sarin gas in a
Damascus suburb on Aug. 21, 2013.

Presumably,
if you don’t toe the line on those dubious U.S. government
narratives, you are part of the Kremlin’s propaganda machine. (In
both cases, there actually are serious reasons to doubt the Western
groupthinks which again lack real evidence.)

But
Shane accuses Sardo and his fellow-travelers of spreading “what
American officials consider to be Russian disinformation on election
hacking, Syria, Ukraine and more.” In other words, if you examine
the evidence on MH-17 or the Syrian sarin case and conclude that the
U.S. government’s claims are dubious if not downright false, you
are somehow disloyal and making Russian officials “gleeful at their
success,” as Shane puts it.

But
what kind of a traitor are you if you quote Shane’s initial
judgment after reading the Jan. 6 report on alleged Russian election
meddling? What are you if you agree with his factual observation that
the report lacked anything approaching “hard evidence”? That’s
a point that also dovetails with what Vladimir Putin has been saying
– that “IP addresses can be simply made up. … This is no
proof”?

So
is Scott Shane a “Kremlin troll,” too? Should the Times
immediately fire him as a disloyal foreign agent? What if Putin says
that 2 plus 2 equals 4 and your child is taught the same thing in
elementary school, what does that say about public school teachers?

Out
of such gibberish come the evils of McCarthyism and the death of the
Enlightenment. Instead of encouraging a questioning citizenry, the
new American paradigm is to silence debate and ridicule anyone who
steps out of line.

You
might have thought people would have learned something from the
disastrous groupthink about Iraqi WMD, a canard that the Times and
most of the U.S. mainstream media eagerly promoted.

But
if you’re feeling generous and thinking that the Times’ editors
must have been chastened by their Iraq-WMD fiasco but perhaps had a
bad day last week and somehow allowed an egregious piece of
journalism to lead their front page, your kind-heartedness would be
shattered on Saturday when the Times’ editorial board penned 
a
laudatory reprise
 of
Scott Shane’s big scoop.

Stripping
away even the few caveats that the article had included, the Times’
editors informed us that “a startling investigation by Scott Shane
of The New York Times, and new research by the cybersecurity firm
FireEye, now reveal, the Kremlin’s stealth intrusion into the
election was far broader and more complex, involving a cyberarmy of
bloggers posing as Americans and spreading propaganda and
disinformation to an American electorate on Facebook, Twitter and
other platforms. …

Now
that the scheming is clear, Facebook and Twitter say they are
reviewing the 2016 race and studying how to defend against such
meddling in the future. … Facing the Russian challenge will involve
complicated issues dealing with secret foreign efforts to undermine
American free speech.”

But
what is the real threat to “American free speech”? Is it the
possibility that Russia – in a very mild imitation of what the U.S.
government does all over the world – used some Web sites
clandestinely to get out its side of various stories, an accusation
against Russia that still lacks any real evidence?

Or
is the bigger threat that the nearly year-long Russia-gate hysteria
will be used to clamp down on Americans who dare question fact-lite
or fact-free Official Narratives handed down by the State Department
and The New York Times?

By Robert
Parry
 /
Republished with permission / 
Consortium
News
 / Report
a typo

=================================

Zie ook: ‘JULIAN ASSANGE OFFERS U.S. GOVERNMENT PROOF RUSSIA WASN’T SOURCE OF DEMOCRATIC PARTY LEAKS, SAYS WSJ‘ (op Stan van Houcke die het overnam van Global Research)

Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Feest in huize Azijnpisser gistermiddag, toen ik op BNR rond 16.41 u. hoorde dat Rusland nu weer door Symantec (o.a. de oplichters van Norton) wordt beschuldigd van het hacken van energiebedrijven, middels fishing mails aan het personeel…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Er mag goddomme wel een heel leger Russen op de westerse straten rondlopen, die zelfs tijd hebben om het personeel van energiebedrijven te volgen en via hun huis achter hun mail adressen te komen, zodat men deze dombo’s (dat moet wel) een zotte mail kan sturen met het vriendelijk verzoek vooral de bijlage te openen!!

Bij BNR kwam men er ook al niet uit. Een figuur in de studio, ik dacht de ‘sidekick’ van de presentator, vertelde dat men wist dat het Russen waren, daar men Russische teksten had gelezen en dat Putin dus alweer verantwoordelijk is. Deze figuur vertelde echter in één adem dat er ook Franse teksten en teksten in andere talen waren gevonden…… Hoe dat dan te rijmen viel met de beschuldiging van Symantec….. Tja daar kwam deze flapdrol ook niet uit, dus stelde hij dat Symantec dit nu eenmaal heeft vastgesteld………. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Ongelofelijk dat de reguliere media nog steeds durven vol te houden dat Rusland achter hacks en manipulaties zit van verkiezingen in de VS en andere westerse landen……. De bewijzen dat dit niet zo is, zijn zo overweldigend, dat je er gigantische dossiers mee kan vullen…… Waar wel volop bewijzen voor zijn, is deze handelswijze uitgevoerd door de VS!! Zelfs de telefoon van Merkel is niet veilig voor de NSA en de CIA!!  Ook onze persoonsgegevens zijn al lang in handen va de VS, met o.a. dank aan PvdA onbenul Plasterk en de geheime diensten AIVD en MIVD……..

Als er nu één land is dat zich bemoeit met het manipuleren van verkiezingen in andere landen is het de VS wel!! Mocht e.e.a. niet lukken zet de CIA wel even een opstand op poten, na eerst het bewuste land deels economisch naar de kloten te hebben geholpen (onvrede creëren), waarna middels een staatsgreep een VS welgevallige marionet kan worden geparachuteerd……. Klus geklaard……. Mocht dit niet lukken, bestaat voor de VS altijd nog de mogelijkheid een illegale oorlog te beginnen, zoals het al zo vaak heeft gedaan…… En ach als deze zaken wat mensenlevens kosten, het is voor ‘de goede zaak’, bovendien: ‘zo is het leven nu eenmaal…….’

Vanmorgen voegde topgraaier Zuckerberg zijn Facebook toe aan het groeiend leger leugenaars, dat Rusland zo ongeveer verantwoordelijk houdt voor alles wat er op de wereld misgaat. Nog net werd de naam Putin niet genoemd, die een groot aantal advertenties op Facebook had gekocht, maar u begrijpt het al: de Russen hebben met die advertenties op Facebook de VS verkiezingen gemanipuleerd…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Toch vreemd, dat het de misdadige democratische partij zoveel tijd heeft gekost, om Zuckerberg te overtuigen mee te gaan in haar leugens……..

Meer bizar toch dat niemand zich druk maakt over wat de VS allemaal uitvreet op de wereld, terwijl men volkomen hysterisch reageert als er een ‘leugengerucht’ wordt gelanceerd………. Zelfs de reguliere westerse massamedia spelen het smerige spel mee!!!!! (dom van mij, daar zonder die media ‘Russia-gate’ nooit zo groot was geworden…..)

Symantec is trouwens bepaald ongeloofwaardig, daar ze eerder juist de VS en andere overheden beschuldigde van het hacken van computers (iets dat ze in  hetzelfde bericht afzwakten…. ha! ha! ha!), zie: ‘‘Regin’, de nieuwe oude spyware van uw overheid……

Zie ook: ‘More Misleading Russia-gate Propaganda‘ (met mogelijkheid tot vertaling onder dat artikel)

       en:  ‘FBI, de spin in het Russiagate web……..

       en: ‘FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information

       en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

       en: ‘Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump

       en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

       en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

       en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..

       en: ‘WannaCry niet door Noord-Korea ‘gelanceerd!’

       en:  ‘False flag terror’ bestaat wel degelijk: bekentenissen en feiten over heel smerige zaken……….

En wat betreft Facebook:

           : ‘Facebook wil samen met door Saoedi-Arabië gesubsidieerde denktank censureren…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Het echte Facebook schandaal: manipulatie van de gebruikers en gratis diensten voor eertijds presidentskandidaat Obama…….

       en: ‘Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook doneerde aan de politici die hem in de VS aan de tand voelden >> in het EU parlement maakte hij gebruik van megalomane EU politici…..

       en:  ‘Jeremy Corbin wordt gedemoniseerd als antisemiet…….

       en: ‘VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’

       en: ‘Facebook e.a. hebben lak aan AVG (GDPR), misbruik persoonsgegevens gaat gewoon door…….

       en: ‘Facebook verlaat ‘tranding news’ voor ‘brekend nieuws’ van 80 reguliere mediaorganen, ofwel nog meer ‘fake news…..’

Google censuur en toch echt nieuws volgen? Gebruik een andere browser naast die van Google, of dump Google helemaal!!

Whitney Webb publiceerde op 25 augustus jl. een artikel op MintPress News, een bericht over het nieuwe censuur beleid van Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Microsoft en Twitter.

Webb geeft in het artikel de alternatieven waarmee je de censoren en geheime onderzoekers (geheime diensten) van de overheid en het bedrijfsleven kan omzeilen, zo kan u uw eigen ‘Virtual Private Network’ (VPN) opzetten, waarmee u zelfs uw IP-adres geheim kan houden.

Google heeft de laatste maanden diverse onafhankelijke mediaorganen geblokkeerd, die niet het algemene westerse politieke (neoliberale) beleid volgen en zich verzetten tegen de enorme berg leugens in de reguliere westerse massamedia……… Google en anderen doen dit in de strijd tegen ‘fake news’, waarbij men voor het gemak even vergeet dat vooral diezelfde massamedia verantwoordelijk zijn voor het brengen van nepnieuws, ofwel ‘fake news……….’ Anders gezegd: Google verzet zich tegen ‘fake news’, door juist de alternatieve media te blokkeren, die ditzelfde ‘fake news’ dag in dag uit aan de paal nagelen!!

‘Fake news’ (of nepnieuws zo je wilt) in de westerse massamedia >> neem de berichtgeving voor en tijdens de illegale oorlogen tegen: Afghanistan, Irak, Libie en nu weer Syrië…….. Om over het tot voor kort lange zwijgen door die media over de oorlog tegen Jemen nog maar te zwijgen… (wat ik nu dus niet doe..) De smerige oorlog en genocide die de reli-fascistische dictatuur van Saoedi-Arabië tegen de sjiitische bevolking van Jemen voert/uitvoert, dit met behulp van een arabische coalitie, aangevuld met de hulp van de VS en Groot-Brittannië……. (en met de stilzwijgende goedkeuring die de meerderheid van westerse politici, als de mislukte PvdA sierkwast Koenders, aan deze oorlog en genocide geven….. Die goedkeuring geven ze door te zwijgen!)

Of wat dacht je van de totaal foute en valse berichtgeving in de westerse massamedia t.a.v. de fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël……

Hier het bewuste artikel van Webb dat ik overnam van Anti-Media, doe er je voordeel mee!

Your
Guide to Avoiding Internet Censorship of Independent News Journalism

August
25, 2017 at 10:43 am

Written
by 
Whitney
Webb

There
are lots of good strategies for beating both corporate and government
Internet censors and snoops. These range from alternatives to Google,
Yahoo, Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter — to direct subscriptions to
authors and pubs — to setting up your own VPN. All are worth the
effort.

(MPN) —
While Google’s
Information Age dominance
 has
long been recognized to have some unsavory consequences, the massive
technology corporation has, in recent months, taken to directly
censoring content and traffic to a variety of independent media
outlets across the political spectrum — essentially muting the
voices of any site or author who does not toe the establishment line.

This
new offensive has coincided with Google efforts to clamp down on
“fake news” and “extremist” content, which – on its
subsidiary, YouTube – led to
 the
categorical blocking
 of
videos portraying war crimes and other disturbing events of the
Syrian conflict and Israel’s occupation of Palestine. Other
independent media figures, such as 
Luke
Rudowski and Carey Wedler
,
on the popular video streaming service, saw 
many
of their videos
 demonetized.

Though
the crackdown on YouTube was more obvious, the Google search engine –
the most popular in the world – is now burying or blocking
independent media sites from its search results.

Conservatives have
long claimed
 that
Google was selectively targeting their content due to the personal
political bias of the company’s executives — but now, since
Google announced its new guidelines, numerous progressive,
transparency, and anti-war websites that act as watchdogs to the
establishment have seen their traffic diminish substantially.

Counterpunch,
World Socialist Website, MintPress News, Democracy Now, American
Civil Liberties Union and Wikileaks are
 just
a handful
 of
the sites that have seen massive drops in their returns from Google
searches. The World Socialist Website alone experienced a 67 percent
decrease in returns from Google following the implementation of
Google’s new algorithm targeting so-called “fake news.”
MintPress News, however, has suffered the steepest decline, having
seen a 76 percent decrease in traffic from Google since the new
algorithm was put into effect.

Why has Google changed its search system to push down publications (left & right) critical of Washington DC?

273 replies3,658 retweets3,623 likes



Google
has its reasons for choosing to censor viewpoints that clash with or
even raise questions about the official narrative. Google shares deep
connections with the U.S.’ political powerbrokers, notably with the
CIA, which 
originally
helped fund
 Google
into existence with the intention of controlling the flow of
information.

Understandably
— in light of its deep connections to those who stand the most to
lose from the actual free flow of information — Google has emerged
as a leader of the “fight” against so-called “fake news.” The
concept of “fake news” took on sudden weight following last
November’s U.S. presidential election: in the tweets and rants of
newly-elected President Donald Trump, media predictions of a Clinton
victory were ridiculed as “FAKE NEWS,” while Clinton supporters
also wound up blaming “fake news” for Clinton’s loss in the
election.

In
short order, the term became a term of derision and dismissal applied
to any and all disagreeable reporting. With the “fake news” net
cast so wide, the ground was fertile for a campaign against the
official story-challenging work of independent media — dependent
for its reach, to a far greater extent than its mainstream media
counterparts, upon the good graces of monster Internet traffic cops
such as Google.

The
following guide offers a variety of solutions and options for those
concerned with Google’s overreach and its decision to become the
Internet’s unelected “Ministry of Truth.”

Dumping
Google Search

Dominating over
80%
 of
global searches made on the Internet, Google’s chokehold on the
flow of information is undeniable. Now that its algorithm has been
shown to target news sites critical of the establishment on both
sides of the aisle, finding an alternative becomes an essential task
irrespective of one’s political leaning.

However,
don’t expect other brand name search engines like Microsoft’s
Bing or Yahoo to come to the rescue, as these too
 have
been caught
 censoring
search results in the past. Microsoft, in particular, is very
untrustworthy, given its
 eager
participation
 in
the NSA’s PRISM surveillance program — where it illegally shared
the Internet user data, including search queries, of U.S. citizens
without their knowledge.

Given
its willingness to cooperate with the government against the interest
of American citizens, Microsoft would be perhaps more willing even
than Google to censor access to so-called “fake news.”

Yahoo
is little better, as it too was an early adopter of the PRISM
surveillance program, second only to Microsoft. Like Microsoft,
they
 willingly
cooperate
 with
government censorship efforts – as well as the
 outing
of dissidents
 –
in other countries.

Thankfully,
as far as search engines go, there are other options available that
not only respect your privacy but also offer fairer searches,
including some features that even Google doesn’t offer.

DuckDuckGo

Of
all the viable Google alternatives, 
DuckDuckGo is
the most well-known, having been promoted by PCMag.com, the Guardian,
and The New York Times as a “long-term” threat to Google’s
search dominance. It was even one of the top 50 sites of 2011,
according to Time magazine.

However,
the “mainstream” accolades are, in this case, well-deserved.
DuckDuckGo is best known for its motto 
the
search engine that doesn’t track you,” complete with 
Tor
browser
 functionality. While
this is a clear boon for privacy enthusiasts – or anyone concerned
about illegal NSA spying – it also results in search results that
are not filtered based on your search history. In other words, users
are more likely to be presented with search results that challenge
their existing ideas.

DuckDuckGo
also boasts 
an
impressive search algorithm
 that
excludes Google results but includes results from other well-known
search engines, mixed with the data obtained by DuckDuckGo’s
own
 web
crawler
 bot.
The results are filtered for spam and re-ordered using its trademark
“Instant Answers” platform, which places high-quality answers
above other results and advertisements. The “Instant Answers”
platform gathers answers provided by top popular websites, like
Wikipedia, in addition to
 community-built answers.

For
those tech-savvy users who don’t trust the spam filtering or even
the “Instant Answer” platform, these functions — as well as
DuckDuckGo itself — is open-source and also offers
 DuckDuckHack,
where users can create their own plug-ins for use in DuckDuckGo and
even help improve the search engine overall.

For
less savvy tech users, DuckDuckGo conveniently functions like any
other search engine, in addition to providing several features
 even
Google doesn’t offer.
 It
also has a search app for both iPhone and Android, as well as
plug-ins for Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox, and offers support in
several languages.

Ixquick/StartPage

Ixquick is
an American/Dutch meta-search engine, meaning it
 simultaneously
searches
 multiple
databases and other search engines
,
including Google, across the Internet. It uses a “star system” to
rank search results, placing a star next to each result for every
search engine that ranks that result as one of its 10 best for a
given search. A five-star result, for example, means that five search
engines considered that result to be among the 10 most relevant.

Ixquick
— which has now merged with its subsidiary, StartPage — also
tackles the issue of privacy by not storing user-specific details
such as cookies or past search results. Like DuckDuckGo, Ixquick
offers unfiltered search results generated by Google’s
“personalized” searches. Privacy enthusiasts may recognize
Ixquick as the default search engine for the Tor browser.

Ixquick
is supported in 17 languages and offers a plug-in for Mozilla
Firefox. They also offer a privacy-minded, encrypted email server
called 
StartMail.

Gibiru

Gibiru,
like the aforementioned search engines, prides itself on offering
maximum privacy. It avoids tracking its users by providing anonymous
and encrypted searches. It describes itself as “the preferred
Search Engine for Patriots” and offers non-personalized, anonymous
web results while emphasizing the disdain of its developers for the
NSA. Part of what sets Gibiru apart is its claim to offer
“uncensored” searches, as their web crawlers intentionally
include pages that Google has blocked or buried in its search
results.

Gibiru
also has a unique feature called “Uncensored News.” In addition
to aggregating results from other search engines, Gibiru adds its own
algorithm that specifically looks for results from independent media
outlets, particularly those that tend to “promote ‘alternative’
views from the mainstream.”

Recognizing
that mainstream media results are picked up by Google and Bing,
Gibiru does not use its bandwidth searching through these results.
Even up-and-coming independent media sites can gain inclusion in
Uncensored News results by communicating with the Gibiru team.

Gibiru
offers both a toolbar and a plugin for Mozilla Firefox.

Subscribe
directly to your favorite pages

Though
the above search engines can assist in more accurate and less
censored internet searches, the best way to get news you trust is
directly from the source. Anyone who reads independent media
eventually develops preferences for certain sites and authors whose
content they consistently find reliable and interesting.

If
you are concerned with Google’s clampdown on independent media, the
most surefire way to ensure your access to the sites you enjoy is by
subscribing directly to them via email. Most independent media pages
offer you the option to subscribe to their mailing lists, where you
receive their top stories on a daily basis. Some pages charge for
subscriptions, but most – such as
 MintPress
News’ Daily Digest
 –
are free and allow you to unsubscribe at any time. Some websites,
including MintPress,
 also
offer apps
 for
Android or iPhone, which allow users direct and convenient access to
the content of those pages.

If
you are concerned that all of the newsletters and stories of the
pages you want to follow will clutter your email, there are several
good options. Some mail servers allow you to label certain types of
incoming mail, and creating a specific label for “news” can
streamline the process of following all of your favorite pages in one
place. Alternatively, you can create an email account dedicated to
news in order to keep it separate from email accounts more focused on
work or socializing.

In
some cases, however, your favorite writers may not regularly publish
in the same place, making their work difficult to follow via email
subscription. Many authors have either their own web pages dedicated
to their work or publish on websites such as 
Medium —
a site offering both free and premium membership options, that hosts
the writings of many big names in independent news from across the
political spectrum.

Signing
up for Medium allows you to follow any writer you like, even
mainstream ones – a boon, for instance, if you like a certain
writer at, say, The Wall Street Journal but don’t trust the paper
as a whole. Certain popular writers in independent media — such
Nafeez Ahmed’s
 Insurge
Intelligence
 —
even publish some of their biggest stories exclusively on Medium.

Dump
social media for news

The Wrath Of Facebook: ‘God’ Smote With 30-Day Ban For Criticizing US Military Spending

Facebook’s moderation system, which combines an automated flagging system with limited human oversight, has consistently drawn criticism, once banning a satirical account which criticized U.S. military spending.(AP/Czarek Sokolowski)

Though
some may value their Facebook account for keeping in touch with
friends and family, the social media giant is quickly becoming
unreliable for receiving news content posted by your friends as well
as the people or pages you follow. Facebook and Twitter have each
been caught censoring on several occasions and both now openly patrol
for “fake news” and “hate speech” — burying stories that
users would otherwise see, based on the recommendations of Facebook
or Twitter-approved flaggers. Many of these flaggers have been found
to publish “fake news” themselves or have a strong bias against
particular viewpoints, particularly those critical of conservative
politics.

Just
as with Google, Facebook and Twitter users can no longer be sure that
their newsfeeds contain the news they want to read, just as content
creators and publishers can no longer expect the same scope and reach
they once enjoyed on social media.

Unfortunately,
the alternatives to Facebook and Twitter are few and lack the large
user communities that make a social network successful. However,
there are two notable sites that are attempting to change that.

One
of those sites is Steemit.
 Steemit is
a social media platform that runs a blogging and social network
website built on top of a blockchain database. Steemit now boasts a
decently sized community, though it hardly compares to Facebook in
terms of daily users. Part of its success has been due to the 
site’s
commitment to paying users for creating and curating popular content
on the site
.
Per the site’s system, users receive digital points (“Steem”)
depending on the success of their posts, which they can exchange for
more tangible rewards or payment via online exchanges. With $1 of
Steem
 now
worth
 just
over $4 USD, some people have found using Steemit to be both socially
and economically beneficial.

Another
potential Facebook competitor is 
Minds —
an
 open
source, encrypted, and community-owned social network site that
values free speech
 and
doesn’t bow to government or advertiser pressure. It hosts
individual user profiles and blogs and creates an unfiltered
newsfeed for its users.

Members
can even be paid for posting their content if it garners a
significant number of views and upvotes. Although at present the
Minds community is tiny compared to that of Facebook, it may in years
to come become a more popular alternative, as Facebook continues to
disappoint.

Avoiding
outright censorship if and when It happens

While
censorship has
 long
been a reality
 in
countries like China, Western governments like to tout themselves as
being the guardians of freedom and the free flow of information. But
many of these governments, particularly the United States, have come
to realize in recent years that they are
 on
the losing side
 of
the “information war,” as trust in the corporate-owned media and
the government itself has sunk to historic lows.

Though
Western governments have, so far, outsourced censorship to technology
companies like Google and Facebook, there is little reason to believe
that these governments will refrain from demanding the outright
censorship of information that doesn’t toe the official line.

Take,
for example, the recent rhetoric of U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May
who, in the wake of the Manchester bombing, has pushed for censoring
“extremist propaganda” online. May’s assertion
 concerned
internet watchdog groups
,
who likened her proposals to China’s widespread censorship of the
Internet.

If
official government censorship comes to your country – or if you
suspect that it is already there – the easiest workaround is
setting up a virtual private network, or VPN. A VPN allows you to use
your computer as though it were connected to a network other than the
one you actually use. In the event of government censorship in your
country, a VPN allows you to virtually connect to a network set up in
another country where such censorship is not in effect. Using a VPN
has the added bonus of greater Internet privacy — as effective VPN
protocols encrypt your traffic, helping to protect you from
government surveillance as well as censorship.

VPNs
are provided by VPN service providers, not all of whom are created
equal. VPN providers with good reputations include Strong VPN,
SurfEasy, and TunnelBear.  Of these, TunnelBear is the least
expensive – offering a free service – and SurfEasy the most
expensive at $11.99 per month. However, the Opera browser now
includes SurfEasy’s VPN services for free. A comprehensive guide on
how to choose the best VPN service provider for your needs can be
found
 here.

By Whitney
Webb
 / Creative
Commons
 / MintPress
News
 / Report
a typo

==================================================

Zie
ook: 

Google manipuleerde VS presidentsverkiezingen van 2016 en censureert niet alleen linkse/alternatieve sociale media


Facebook
stelt perstituee van New York Times aan als censuur-agent…… ha!
ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

May,
premier GB, wil als reactie op de aanslagen in Londen en Manchester,
de mensenrechten buiten werking stellen en censuur op het internet
doorvoeren……….

Boris
Johnson wil (sociale) media controleren en censureren…….

Washington
Post medewerkers is verboden grote adverteerders te bekritiseren…..
Of hoe miljonairs en miljardairs de voorheen onafhankelijk pers
beheren

Censuur teistert het internet: video over aanslag Las Vegas verwijderd door YouTube…………. 

Facebook, baas mag internetactiviteit werknemers niet zomaar inzien……. AUW!!!

Het FD bracht gisteren een artikel waarin wordt gesteld dat de baas niet zomaar de internetactiviteiten van werknemers mag inzien, ‘daar moeten goede redenen voor zijn……’  ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! En waar die goede redenen ontbreken, worden ze door de werkgever gemaakt!!

Reden voor het artikel is de Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens (AP NL*) die een rapport van de Artikel 29-Werkgroep naar buiten bracht, Deze werkgroep is een ‘onafhankelijk advies- en overlegorgaan’ voor onder meer de EU privacywaakhonden, of anders gezegd privacytoezichthouders.

De werkgroep is er niet gerust op, dat werkgevers niet buiten hun boekje zouden gaan en stellen in hun rapport dan ook, dat privacyrechten niet alleen voor vastpersoneel gelden, maar ook voor stagiairs en (tijdelijk) flexpersoneel……..

Uiteraard leeft deze werkgroep buiten de realiteit, immers de werkgever zal van de werknemers bij sollicitatie vragen of deze bezwaar heeft tegen controle van de internetactiviteiten, zoals die op Facebook of Twitter……. U begrijpt dat iemand die een baan graag wil, niet met ‘nee’ zal antwoorden……..

Overigens geldt hetzelfde voor bestaand personeel, of ze nu flex of vast werken. Immers bij weigering kan de baas het de werknemer zo moeilijk maken, dat deze het functioneren binnen het bedrijf onmogelijk wordt gemaakt, of de baas zoekt eenvoudigweg de eerste beste stok om ‘de hond’ te slaan………

Vreemd dat werknemers die als klokkenluider misdadig of ander oneigenlijk gedrag van de baas aan de kaak stellen, zij er donder op kunnen zeggen dat ze hun baan verliezen bij uitkomst van hun naam als klokkenluider. Daar verandert het belachelijke klokkenluidershuis niets aan (zo mag je als je je daar aanmeldt verder met letterlijk niemand praten over de zaak die je aanbracht…….)…..

Trouwens, wat als je erachter komt dat je baas nazi-sympathisant is, of aanhanger van de valswitte haatprofeet Geert Wilders? Eén ding is zeker, als werkloze mag je een baan bij zo’n hufter niet eens weigeren!!

Hier de link naar het FD artikel.

* AP staat ook voor Associated Press, vandaar de toevoeging NL (overigens staat deze afkorting voor het eerst als label onder dit bericht, dus geen klik naar een ander bericht).

Overigens over Facebook gesproken: op mijn Facebookpagina kan u naast meldingen van nieuwe berichten, ook petities vinden en intussen meer dan 700 albums (via YouTube) met fiks uiteenlopende mooie muziek (al kost dat wel wat ‘scroll activiteit’, dus maar niet in de baas z’n tijd doen). Wellicht wil uw baas niet eens, dat u mijn blog bezoekt…….

Paul Tang (PvdA): ‘fake news’ wordt via Facebook verspreid…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Paul Tang, grootoplichter van de PvdA en grofgraaier in het ‘EU parlement’, merkte afgelopen zaterdag in Kots Kamerbreed op, dat ‘ fake news’ (nepnieuws) wordt verspreid via Facebook…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Inderdaad Tang, ook daar kan je berichten van o.a. de Telegraaf, de Volkskrant, NRC en AD vinden!!

Uiteraard doelde Tang daar niet op, nee hij bedoeld de alternatieve mediaorganen, die voor een groot deel bezig zijn met het weerleggen van de berichtgeving in de reguliere (massa-) media, om daarmee het publiek het ware verhaal te vertellen….. Neem de verslaggeving van de reguliere media in aanloop van- en tijdens de illegale oorlogen tegen Afghanistan, Irak, Libië en nu Syrië!! (om over de door de neonazi-junta van Porosjenko geregeerde Oekraïne maar te zwijgen……..).

Ach ja, Tang eens een oplichter………

Zie ook: ‘Egregious Lies and Crimes Are The Foundation of Western Foreign Policy

       en: ‘Russia, fake news, Trump and other lunacies >> Robbie Martin and “A Very Heavy Agenda”‘, een paar minuten: vanaf 14 minuten en 44 seconden (via de link start het geluidsfragment op 14 min. en 37 sec.).

       en: ‘Blaming Russia For Everything

Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.

Facebook stelt perstituee van New York Times aan als censuur-agent…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Vanavond herdenken we de doden uit de Tweede Wereldoorlog, burgers zowel als militairen*. Een oorlog waar het verzet niet alleen vocht voor de bevrijding van het nazi-monster, maar ook vocht voor eerbiediging van de mensenrechten, voor de vrijheid van meningsuiting, tegen censuur en nog een heel aantal andere zaken……..

Oh ja het verzet vocht ook voor een land, waar men een normale toelating van vluchtelingen zou eerbiedigen >> ook voor WOII was de Nederlandse regering fanatiek op het verminderen van het aantal toe te laten vluchtelingen. Zo werden veel: joden, Roma, Sinti, homo’s en politieke vluchtelingen ‘gewoon teruggestuurd’ de grens over, recht in de handen van de Gestapo………  Denk daar alstublieft ook aan vanavond tijdens de Dodenherdenking! (het Nationaal Comité 4 en 5 mei wil niet dat u vanavond vluchtelingen herdenkt…………)

Wrang dat ik gisteren van Anti-Media een artikel ontving, waarin de censuur-agenten genoemd staan, die Facebook aanstelt om ‘fake news’ (‘nepnieuws’) van de site te houden…….

Mag u raden van welke nepnieuwsorganen de twee censuur-agenten komen…… Oh dat werkt niet, welnu: van CNN, NBC en de NYT………. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Het gaat om Alex Hardiman van de New York Times (NYT) en Campbell Brown van CNN en National Broadcasting Company (NBC).

Weet u nog hoe deze mediaorganen alle leugens van het Pentagon slikten en fanatiek als waarheid hebben gespuit, vooraf en ten tijde van de illegale VS oorlogen tegen: Afghanistan, Irak, Libië en nu weer tegen Syrië (en zoals het zich laat aanzien meer en meer VS deelname in de wel heel smerige oorlog van de reli-fascistische terreurentiteit** Saoedi-Arabië tegen het Jemenitische volk….)……..

Onbegrijpelijk dat journalisten zich zelfs met deze zaak durven te bemoeien, laat staan als censuur-agent in dienst te treden………. Ach ja, zo komen dictaturen ook altijd aan censuur-agenten………..

Kortom Facebook doet lekker mee aan de ‘fake news’ hysterie, waarmee men juist de alternatieve pers de mond wil snoeren, niet de reguliere massamedia, die oorlog en ellende als rechtvaardige zaken door de strot van de mensheid proppen, middels de ene grove leugen na de andere!!!

Eén ding is zeker, het is de hoogste tijd, dat Facebook een week of langer wordt geboycot!! Hoewel 1 dag waarschijnlijk al een fikse kostenpost zou zijn (mits minimaal 60% van de gebruikers meedoet).

Lezen mensen!

Facebook
Puts New York Times Veteran In Charge of Stopping ‘Fake News’

Facebook Puts New York Times Veteran In Charge of Stopping ‘Fake News’

May
3, 2017 at 11:31 am

Written
by 
Anti-Media
Staff

(ANTIMEDIA) On
April 10, 
Anti-Media published
an 
article titled
“Google Putting CNN, Washington Post, NYT in Charge of
Fact-Checking News.”

The
title says it all. Through its new Fact Check feature on news
stories, Google has put the job of informing the citizenry of what’s
true and what’s false — on Google searches, at least — squarely
in the hands of the corporate media.

Now,
it’s seeming more and more that in the future, Facebook will be
relegating its share of the fight against so-called fake news to
corporate media outlets as well.

From
Business
Insider
 report on
Tuesday:

Facebook
has appointed a veteran of The New York Times to lead its news
products division, which is responsible for stopping the spread of
fake news and helping publishers make money.”

That
veteran, Alex Hardiman, held a half-dozen positions during her
decade-long stint at the Times. She left as vice
president of news products.

It’s
all part of the Facebook Journalism Project, 
announced in
January after the social media giant took heat during the election
over its 
refusal to
take responsibility for the content it propagates.

That
announcement came just a few days after the company 
revealed it
was tapping former 
CNN and NBC anchor
Campbell Brown as its head of news partnerships.

Brown said her
new role would be to “
help
news organizations and journalists work more closely and more
effectively with Facebook”
 and
to “
help
them understand how Facebook can expand the reach of their
journalism, and contribute value to their businesses.”

Appropriately
enough, in a Facebook 
post on
Monday, Hardiman described what her duties will be in the
newly-created position:

We
will spend time building better products and tools for journalists,
working hand-in-hand with Campbell Brown and her team to strengthen
the relationship and value exchange between Facebook and news
providers. We will also partner with teams in Facebook to continue
curbing the spread of false news.”

Creative
Commons
 Anti-Media Report
a typo

=========================

* Wat betreft de soldaten die in ‘oorlogssituaties’ vielen, ‘situaties als de Politionele Acties (smerige koloniale oorlog), de illegale oorlog tegen Joegoslavië, Afghanistan en Irak: hen kan je misschien herdenken, daar zij niet de beslissing hebben genomen op oorlogspad te gaan….. Lullig genoeg hebben de militaire-missies, waar zij deel van uitmaakten, elders ook veel slachtoffers gemaakt, vooral veel burgerslachtoffers (vaak vrouwen en kinderen) en dat in landen waar wij niets te zoeken hadden of hebben…… Zoals nazi-Duitsland in 1940 niets te zoeken had in Nederland, of welk ander land dan ook.

** Waar de VS uiteraard al sinds het einde van WOII verreweg de grootste terreurentiteit op aarde is!

Zie ook: ‘May, premier GB, wil als reactie op de aanslagen in Londen en Manchester, de mensenrechten buiten werking stellen en censuur op het internet doorvoeren……….

       en: ‘Boris Johnson wil (sociale) media controleren en censureren…….

       en: ‘Washington Post medewerkers is verboden grote adverteerders te bekritiseren….. Of hoe miljonairs en miljardairs de voorheen onafhankelijk pers beheren

       en: ‘Censuur teistert het internet: video over aanslag Las Vegas verwijderd door YouTube…………. 

       en: ‘Google censuur en toch echt nieuws volgen? Gebruik een andere browser naast die van Google, of dump Google helemaal!!

       en: ‘AVG: Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens (geleid door Aleid Wolfsen PvdA) niet berekend op EU wetgeving…….

       en: ‘Facebook e.a. hebben lak aan AVG (GDPR), misbruik persoonsgegevens gaat gewoon door…….

       en: ‘Het echte Facebook schandaal: manipulatie van de gebruikers en gratis diensten voor eertijds presidentskandidaat Obama…….

       en: ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook doneerde aan de politici die hem in de VS aan de tand voelden >> in het EU parlement maakte hij gebruik van megalomane EU politici…..

       en: ‘Facebook wil samen met door Saoedi-Arabië gesubsidieerde denktank censureren…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Wie het nieuws controleert, controleert de wereld……

       en: ‘Westerse massa misleiding in aanloop naar WOIII……

       en: ‘VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’

       en: ‘Facebook verlaat ‘tranding news’ voor ‘brekend nieuws’ van 80 reguliere mediaorganen, ofwel nog meer ‘fake news…..’

       en: ‘Facebook komt met nieuwsshows van betrouwbare media als CNN en Fox News…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden, dat geldt niet voor de labels: C. Brown en A. Hardiman. Zie ook de berichten onder de labels: New York Times, CNN en NBC.

CIA de ware hacker en manipulator van verkiezingen, ofwel de laatste Wikileaks documenten………

Na alle nepnieuws (of ‘fake news’) over hacks en andere manipulaties ‘door Rusland gepleegd’ in het buitenland, bracht Wikileaks gisteren het bericht, waarin de echte grote smeerlap voor de zoveelste keer werd ontmaskerd: de VS en dan m.n. de CIA!!

Zo bracht de CIA o.a. besmette software op het net, waarmee niet alleen ‘slimme’ telefoons en computers kunnen worden gehackt, maar zelfs ‘slimme’ televisies’ zijn niet veilig (die als microfoon kunnen dienen, ook als ze uitgeschakeld zijn..)…….

Wikileaks publiceerde de eerste 8.000 pagina’s, met diverse handleidingen die de CIA en NSA gebruiken om in te breken. De CIA heeft een team van 500 mensen vrijgemaakt, die e.e.a. hebben uitgedokterd, waar de NSA bewust buiten werd gehouden.

De boel ‘was zo goed beveiligd’ door de CIA, dat niet alleen Wikileaks erbij kon, maar bijvoorbeeld ook misdaadorganisaties………..

U snapt natuurlijk, dat de zoveelste openbaring over smerige streken van de VS, niet dezelfde ophef geven in het westen, als de leugen over Russische hacks………..

Hieronder een artikel dat ik gisteren ontving van Anti-Media, met daaronder een aantal vragen over de nieuwste openbaarmakingen van Wikileaks, bedoeld voor de pers, waar uzelf, als niet journalist, ook baat bij kan hebben.

Wikileaks
Releases “Vault 7”: Reveals The CIA’s Hacking Tools

(ZHELast
night 
Wikileaks
announced 
that
it has released an encrypted torrent file which reportedly contains
information on the mysterious “Vault 7,” and which we now know is
the biggest “collection of material about CIA activities obtained
by WikiLeaks publication in history.” It can be downloaded 
now
at the following URL
,
and accessed using the
password: 
SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds”

Wikileaks
had previously announced that it would hold an 8am Eastern press
conference, as part of the unveiling.

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

ANNOUNCE: WikiLeaks press conference in under five hours at 8am ET / 1pm UTC / 14:00 CET. Streamed live. 

However,
there appeared to have been some complications, with Wikileaks
tweeting that “
the
press conference is under attack: Facebook+Periscope video used by
WikiLeaks’ editor Julian Assange have been attacked
.
Activating contingency plans.”

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

Press conf under attack: Facebook+Periscope video used by WikiLeaks’ editor Julian Assange have been attacked. Activating contingency (1/2)

Wikileaks
then announced that “As Mr. Assange’s Perscipe+Facebook video
stream links are under attack his video press conference will be
rescheduled.”

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

NOTICE: As Mr. Assange’s Perscipe+Facebook video stream links are under attack his video press conference will be rescheduled.

In
a separate tweet, Wikileaks has just released the passphrase to
decrypt the torrent file: RELEASE: CIA Vault 7 Year Zero decryption
passphrase: 
SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

RELEASE: CIA Vault 7 Year Zero decryption passphrase:

SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds

As
a result, since Assange appears to have been unable to launch his
previously scheduled press conference, he has gone ahead and issued
the press release on 
Vault
7 Part 1 “Year Zero, 
which
is titled: 
Inside
the CIA’s global hacking force
:

Press
Release

Vault
7: CIA Hacking Tools Revealed

Today,
Tuesday 7 March 2017, WikiLeaks begins its new series of leaks on the
U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Code-named “Vault 7” by
WikiLeaks, it is the largest ever publication of confidential
documents on the agency.

The
first full part of the series, “Year Zero”, comprises 8,761
documents and files from an isolated, high-security network situated
inside the CIA’s 
Center
for Cyber Intelligence
 in
Langley, Virgina. It follows an introductory disclosure last month
of 
CIA
targeting French political parties and candidates in the lead up to
the 2012 presidential election
.

Recently,
the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including
malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized “zero day” exploits,
malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This
extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred
million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking
capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated
among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an
unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions
of the archive.

Year
Zero” introduces the scope and direction of the CIA’s global
covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of “zero
day” weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European
company products, include Apple’s iPhone, Google’s Android and
Microsoft’s Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into
covert microphones.

Since
2001 the CIA has gained political and budgetary preeminence over the
U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The CIA found itself building
not just its now infamous drone fleet, but a very different type of
covert, globe-spanning force — its own substantial fleet of
hackers. The agency’s hacking division freed it from having to
disclose its often controversial operations to the NSA (its primary
bureaucratic rival) in order to draw on the NSA’s hacking
capacities.

By
the end of 2016, the CIA’s hacking division, which formally falls
under the agency’s 
Center
for Cyber Intelligence
 (CCI),
had over 5000 registered users and had produced more than a thousand
hacking systems, trojans, viruses, and other “weaponized”
malware. Such is the scale of the CIA’s undertaking that by 2016,
its hackers had utilized more code than that used to run Facebook.
The CIA had created, in effect, its “own NSA” with even less
accountability and without publicly answering the question as to
whether such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capacities
of a rival agency could be justified.

In
a statement to WikiLeaks the source details policy questions that
they say urgently need to be debated in public, including whether the
CIA’s hacking capabilities exceed its mandated powers and the
problem of public oversight of the agency. The source wishes to
initiate a public debate about the security, creation, use,
proliferation and democratic control of cyberweapons.

Once
a single cyber ‘weapon’ is ‘loose’ it can spread around the
world in seconds, to be used by rival states, cyber mafia and teenage
hackers alike.

Julian
Assange, WikiLeaks editor stated that “There is an extreme
proliferation risk in the development of cyber ‘weapons’.
Comparisons can be drawn between the uncontrolled proliferation of
such ‘weapons’, which results from the inability to contain them
combined with their high market value, and the global arms trade. But
the significance of “Year Zero” goes well beyond the choice
between cyberwar and cyberpeace. The disclosure is also exceptional
from a political, legal and forensic perspective.”

Wikileaks
has carefully reviewed the “Year Zero” disclosure and published
substantive CIA documentation while avoiding the distribution of
‘armed’ cyberweapons until a consensus emerges on the technical
and political nature of the CIA’s program and how such ‘weapons’
should analyzed, disarmed and published.

Wikileaks
has also decided to 
redact and
anonymise some identifying information in “Year Zero” for in
depth analysis. These redactions include ten of thousands of CIA
targets and attack machines throughout Latin America, Europe and the
United States. While we are aware of the imperfect results of any
approach chosen, we remain committed to our publishing model and note
that the quantity of published pages in “Vault 7” part one (“Year
Zero”) already eclipses the total number of pages published over
the first three years of the Edward Snowden NSA leaks.

* *
*

Analysis

CIA
malware targets iPhone, Android, smart TVs

CIA
malware and hacking tools are built by EDG (Engineering Development
Group), a software development group within CCI (Center for Cyber
Intelligence), a department belonging to the CIA’s DDI (Directorate
for Digital Innovation). The DDI is one of the five major
directorates of the CIA (see this
 organizational
chart
 of
the CIA for more details).

The
EDG is responsible for the development, testing and operational
support of all backdoors, exploits, malicious payloads, trojans,
viruses and any other kind of malware used by the CIA in its covert
operations world-wide.

The
increasing sophistication of surveillance techniques has drawn
comparisons with George Orwell’s 1984, but “Weeping Angel”,
developed by the CIA’s 
Embedded
Devices Branch (EDB)
,
which infests smart TVs, transforming them into covert microphones,
is surely its most emblematic realization.

The
attack against 
Samsung
smart TVs
 was
developed in cooperation with the United Kingdom’s MI5/BTSS. After
infestation, Weeping Angel places the target TV in a ‘Fake-Off’
mode, so that the owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on.
In ‘Fake-Off’ mode the TV operates as a bug, recording
conversations in the room and sending them over the Internet to a
covert CIA server.

As
of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at 
infecting
the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks
.
The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the
CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations.

The
CIA’s Mobile Devices Branch (MDB) developed 
numerous
attacks to remotely hack and control popular smart phones
.
Infected phones can be instructed to send the CIA the user’s
geolocation, audio and text communications as well as covertly
activate the phone’s camera and microphone.

Despite
iPhone’s minority share (14.5%) of the global smart phone market in
2016, a specialized unit in the CIA’s Mobile Development Branch
produces malware to infest, control and exfiltrate data from 
iPhones
and other Apple products running iOS, such as iPads
.
CIA’s arsenal includes 
numerous
local and remote “zero days”
 developed
by CIA or obtained from GCHQ, NSA, FBI or purchased from cyber arms
contractors such as Baitshop. The disproportionate focus on iOS may
be explained by the popularity of the iPhone among social, political,
diplomatic and business elites.

similar
unit targets Google’s Android which is used to run the majority of
the world’s smart phones (~85%) including Samsung, HTC and Sony
.
1.15 billion Android powered phones were sold last year. “Year
Zero” shows that as of 2016 
the
CIA had 24 “weaponized” Android “zero days”
 which
it has developed itself and obtained from GCHQ, NSA and cyber arms
contractors.

These
techniques permit the CIA to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp,
Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking the “smart”
phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic
before encryption is applied.

CIA
malware targets Windows, OSx, Linux, routers

The
CIA also runs a very substantial effort to infect and
control 
Microsoft
Windows users
 with
its malware. This includes multiple local and remote weaponized “zero
days”, air gap jumping viruses such as 
“Hammer
Drill”
 which
infects software distributed on CD/DVDs, 
infectors
for removable media such as USBs
,
systems to 
hide
data in images
 or
in covert disk areas (
 “Brutal
Kangaroo”
)
and to 
keep
its malware infestations going
.

Many
of these infection efforts are pulled together by the CIA’s 
Automated
Implant Branch (AIB)
,
which has developed several attack systems for automated infestation
and control of CIA malware, such as “Assassin” and “Medusa”.

Attacks
against Internet infrastructure and webservers are developed by the
CIA’s 
Network
Devices Branch (NDB)
.

The
CIA has developed automated multi-platform malware attack and control
systems covering Windows, Mac OS X, Solaris, Linux and more, such as
EDB’s “HIVE” and the related “Cutthroat” and “Swindle”
tools, which are 
described
in the examples section below
.

CIA
‘hoarded’ vulnerabilities (“zero days”)

In
the wake of Edward Snowden’s leaks about the NSA, the U.S.
technology industry secured a commitment from the Obama
administration that the executive would disclose on an ongoing basis
— rather than hoard — serious vulnerabilities, exploits, bugs or
“zero days” to Apple, Google, Microsoft, and other US-based
manufacturers.

Serious
vulnerabilities not disclosed to the manufacturers places huge
swathes of the population and critical infrastructure at risk to
foreign intelligence or cyber criminals who independently discover or
hear rumors of the vulnerability. If the CIA can discover such
vulnerabilities so can others.

The
U.S. government’s commitment to the 
Vulnerabilities
Equities Process
 came
after significant lobbying by US technology companies, who risk
losing their share of the global market over real and perceived
hidden vulnerabilities. The government stated that it would disclose
all pervasive vulnerabilities discovered after 2010 on an ongoing
basis.

Year
Zero” documents show that the CIA breached the Obama
administration’s commitments. Many of the vulnerabilities used in
the CIA’s cyber arsenal are pervasive and some may already have
been found by rival intelligence agencies or cyber criminals.

As
an example, specific CIA malware revealed in “Year Zero” is able
to penetrate, infest and control both the Android phone and iPhone
software that runs or has run presidential Twitter accounts. The CIA
attacks this software by using undisclosed security vulnerabilities
(“zero days”) possessed by the CIA but if the CIA can hack these
phones then so can everyone else who has obtained or discovered the
vulnerability. As long as the CIA keeps these vulnerabilities
concealed from Apple and Google (who make the phones) they will not
be fixed, and the phones will remain hackable.

The
same vulnerabilities exist for the population at large, including the
U.S. Cabinet, Congress, top CEOs, system administrators, security
officers and engineers. By hiding these security flaws from
manufacturers like Apple and Google the CIA ensures that it can hack
everyone &mdsh; at the expense of leaving everyone hackable.

Cyberwar’
programs are a serious proliferation risk

Cyber
‘weapons’ are not possible to keep under effective control.

While
nuclear proliferation has been restrained by the enormous costs and
visible infrastructure involved in assembling enough fissile material
to produce a critical nuclear mass, cyber ‘weapons’, once
developed, are very hard to retain.

Cyber
‘weapons’ are in fact just computer programs which can be pirated
like any other. Since they are entirely comprised of information they
can be copied quickly with no marginal cost.

Securing
such ‘weapons’ is particularly difficult since the same people
who develop and use them have the skills to exfiltrate copies without
leaving traces — sometimes by using the very same ‘weapons’
against the organizations that contain them. There are substantial
price incentives for government hackers and consultants to obtain
copies since there is a global “vulnerability market” that will
pay hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars for copies of such
‘weapons’. Similarly, contractors and companies who obtain such
‘weapons’ sometimes use them for their own purposes, obtaining
advantage over their competitors in selling ‘hacking’ services.

Over
the last three years the United States intelligence sector, which
consists of government agencies such as the CIA and NSA and their
contractors, such as Booze Allan Hamilton, has been subject to
unprecedented series of data exfiltrations by its own workers.

A
number of intelligence community members not yet publicly named have
been arrested or subject to federal criminal investigations in
separate incidents.

Most
visibly, on February 8, 2017 a U.S. federal grand jury indicted
Harold T. Martin III with 20 counts of mishandling classified
information. The Department of Justice alleged that it seized some
50,000 gigabytes of information from Harold T. Martin III that he had
obtained from classified programs at NSA and CIA, including the
source code for numerous hacking tools.

Once
a single cyber ‘weapon’ is ‘loose’ it can spread around the
world in seconds, to be used by peer states, cyber mafia and teenage
hackers alike.

U.S.
Consulate in Frankfurt is a covert CIA hacker base

In
addition to its operations in Langley, Virginia the CIA also uses the
U.S. consulate in Frankfurt as a covert base for its hackers covering
Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

CIA
hackers operating out of the Frankfurt consulate (
 “Center
for Cyber Intelligence Europe”
 or
CCIE) are given diplomatic (“black”) passports and State
Department cover. 
The
instructions for incoming CIA hackers
 make
Germany’s counter-intelligence efforts appear inconsequential:
“Breeze through German Customs because you have your
cover-for-action story down pat, and all they did was stamp your
passport”

Your
Cover Story (for this trip)

Q: Why are you
here?
A: Supporting technical consultations at the
Consulate.

Two
earlier WikiLeaks publications give further detail on CIA approaches
to 
customs and secondary
screening procedures
.

Once
in Frankfurt CIA hackers can travel without further border checks to
the 25 European countries that are part of the Shengen open border
area — including France, Italy and Switzerland.

A
number of the CIA’s electronic attack methods are designed for
physical proximity. These attack methods are able to penetrate high
security networks that are disconnected from the internet, such as
police record database. In these cases, a CIA officer, agent or
allied intelligence officer acting under instructions, physically
infiltrates the targeted workplace. The attacker is provided with a
USB containing malware developed for the CIA for this purpose, which
is inserted into the targeted computer. The attacker then infects and
exfiltrates data to removable media. For example, the CIA attack
system 
Fine
Dining
,
provides 24 decoy applications for CIA spies to use. To witnesses,
the spy appears to be running a program showing videos (e.g VLC),
presenting slides (Prezi), playing a computer game (Breakout2, 2048)
or even running a fake virus scanner (Kaspersky, McAfee, Sophos). But
while the decoy application is on the screen, the underlaying system
is automatically infected and ransacked.

How
the CIA dramatically increased proliferation risks

In
what is surely one of the most astounding intelligence own goals in
living memory, the CIA structured its classification regime such that
for the most market valuable part of “Vault 7” — the CIA’s
weaponized malware (implants + zero days), Listening Posts (LP), and
Command and Control (C2) systems — the agency has little legal
recourse.

The
CIA made these systems unclassified.

Why
the CIA chose to make its cyberarsenal unclassified reveals how
concepts developed for military use do not easily crossover to the
‘battlefield’ of cyber ‘war’.

To
attack its targets, the CIA usually requires that its implants
communicate with their control programs over the internet. If CIA
implants, Command & Control and Listening Post software were
classified, then CIA officers could be prosecuted or dismissed for
violating rules that prohibit placing classified information onto the
Internet. Consequently the CIA has secretly made most of its cyber
spying/war code unclassified. The U.S. government is not able to
assert copyright either, due to restrictions in the U.S.
Constitution. This means that cyber ‘arms’ manufactures and
computer hackers can freely “pirate” these ‘weapons’ if they
are obtained. The CIA has primarily had to rely on obfuscation to
protect its malware secrets.

Conventional
weapons such as missiles may be fired at the enemy (i.e into an
unsecured area). Proximity to or impact with the target detonates the
ordnance including its classified parts. Hence military personnel do
not violate classification rules by firing ordnance with classified
parts. Ordnance will likely explode. If it does not, that is not the
operator’s intent.

Over
the last decade U.S. hacking operations have been increasingly
dressed up in military jargon to tap into Department of Defense
funding streams. For instance, attempted “malware injections”
(commercial jargon) or “implant drops” (NSA jargon) are being
called “fires” as if a weapon was being fired. However the
analogy is questionable.

Unlike
bullets, bombs or missiles, most CIA malware is designed to live for
days or even years after it has reached its ‘target’. CIA malware
does not “explode on impact” but rather permanently infests its
target. In order to infect target’s device, copies of the malware
must be placed on the target’s devices, giving physical possession
of the malware to the target.

To
exfiltrate data back to the CIA or to await further instructions the
malware must communicate with CIA Command & Control (C2) systems
placed on internet connected servers. But such servers are typically
not approved to hold classified information, so CIA command and
control systems are also made unclassified.

A
successful ‘attack’ on a target’s computer system is more like
a series of complex stock maneuvers in a hostile take-over bid or the
careful planting of rumors in order to gain control over an
organization’s leadership rather than the firing of a weapons
system. If there is a military analogy to be made, the infestation of
a target is perhaps akin to the execution of a whole series of
military maneuvers against the target’s territory including
observation, infiltration, occupation and exploitation.

Evading
forensics and anti-virus

A
series of standards lay out CIA malware infestation patterns which
are likely to assist forensic crime scene investigators as well as
Apple, Microsoft, Google, Samsung, Nokia, Blackberry, Siemens and
anti-virus companies attribute and defend against attacks.

Tradecraft
DO’s and DON’Ts”
 contains
CIA rules on how its malware should be written to avoid fingerprints
implicating the “CIA, US government, or its witting partner
companies” in “forensic review”. Similar secret standards cover
the 
use
of encryption to hide CIA hacker and malware
communication
 (pdf), describing
targets & exfiltrated data
 (pdf)
as well as 
executing
payloads
 (pdf)
and 
persisting (pdf)
in the target’s machines over time.

CIA
hackers developed successful attacks against most well known
anti-virus programs. These are documented in 
AV
defeats
Personal
Security Products
Detecting
and defeating PSPs
 and PSP/Debugger/RE
Avoidance
.
For example, Comodo was defeated by 
CIA
malware placing itself in the Window’s “Recycle Bin”
.
While Comodo 6.x has a 
“Gaping
Hole of DOOM”
.

CIA
hackers discussed what the NSA’s “Equation Group” hackers did
wrong and 
how
the CIA’s malware makers could avoid similar exposure
.

Examples

The
CIA’s Engineering Development Group (EDG) management system
contains around 500 different projects (only some of which are
documented by “Year Zero”) each with their own sub-projects,
malware and hacker tools.

The
majority of these projects relate to tools that are used for
penetration, infestation (“implanting”), control, and
exfiltration.

Another
branch of development focuses on the development and operation of
Listening Posts (LP) and Command and Control (C2) systems used to
communicate with and control CIA implants; special projects are used
to target specific hardware from routers to smart TVs.

Some
example projects are described below, but see 
the
table of contents
 for
the full list of projects described by WikiLeaks’ “Year Zero”.

UMBRAGE

The
CIA’s hand crafted hacking techniques pose a problem for the
agency. Each technique it has created forms a “fingerprint” that
can be used by forensic investigators to attribute multiple different
attacks to the same entity.

This
is analogous to finding the same distinctive knife wound on multiple
separate murder victims. The unique wounding style creates suspicion
that a single murderer is responsible. As soon one murder in the set
is solved then the other murders also find likely attribution.

The
CIA’s 
Remote
Devices Branch
‘s UMBRAGE
group
 collects
and maintains 
a
substantial library
 of
attack techniques ‘stolen’ from malware produced in other states
including the Russian Federation.

With
UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total
number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving
behind the “fingerprints” of the groups that the attack
techniques were stolen from.

UMBRAGE
components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture,
data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth,
anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.

Fine
Dining

Fine
Dining comes with a standardized questionnaire i.e menu that CIA case
officers fill out. The questionnaire is used by the agency’s OSB
(
Operational
Support Branch
)
to transform the requests of case officers into technical
requirements for hacking attacks (typically “exfiltrating”
information from computer systems) for specific operations. The
questionnaire allows the OSB to identify how to adapt existing tools
for the operation, and communicate this to CIA malware configuration
staff. The OSB functions as the interface between CIA operational
staff and the relevant technical support staff.

Among
the list of possible targets of the collection are ‘Asset’,
‘Liason Asset’, ‘System Administrator’, ‘Foreign
Information Operations’, ‘Foreign Intelligence Agencies’ and
‘Foreign Government Entities’. Notably absent is any reference to
extremists or transnational criminals. The ‘Case Officer’ is also
asked to specify the environment of the target like the type of
computer, operating system used, Internet connectivity and installed
anti-virus utilities (PSPs) as well as a list of file types to be
exfiltrated like Office documents, audio, video, images or custom
file types. The ‘menu’ also asks for information if recurring
access to the target is possible and how long unobserved access to
the computer can be maintained. This information is used by the CIA’s
‘JQJIMPROVISE’ software (see below) to configure a set of CIA
malware suited to the specific needs of an operation.

Improvise
(JQJIMPROVISE)

Improvise’
is a toolset for configuration, post-processing, payload setup and
execution vector selection for survey/exfiltration tools supporting
all major operating systems like Windows (Bartender), MacOS (JukeBox)
and Linux (DanceFloor). Its configuration utilities like Margarita
allows the NOC (Network Operation Center) to customize tools based on
requirements from ‘Fine Dining’ questionairies.

HIVE

HIVE
is a multi-platform CIA malware suite and its associated control
software. The project provides customizable implants for Windows,
Solaris, MikroTik (used in internet routers) and Linux platforms and
a Listening Post (LP)/Command and Control (C2) infrastructure to
communicate with these implants.

The
implants are configured to communicate via HTTPS with the webserver
of a cover domain; each operation utilizing these implants has a
separate cover domain and the infrastructure can handle any number of
cover domains.

Each
cover domain resolves to an IP address that is located at a
commercial VPS (Virtual Private Server) provider. The public-facing
server forwards all incoming traffic via a VPN to a ‘Blot’ server
that handles actual connection requests from clients. It is setup for
optional SSL client authentication: if a client sends a valid client
certificate (only implants can do that), the connection is forwarded
to the ‘Honeycomb’ toolserver that communicates with the implant;
if a valid certificate is missing (which is the case if someone tries
to open the cover domain website by accident), the traffic is
forwarded to a cover server that delivers an unsuspicious looking
website.

The
Honeycomb toolserver receives exfiltrated information from the
implant; an operator can also task the implant to execute jobs on the
target computer, so the toolserver acts as a C2 (command and control)
server for the implant.

Similar
functionality (though limited to Windows) is provided by the
RickBobby project.

See
the classified 
user and developer guides
for HIVE.

* *
*

FREQUENTLY
ASKED QUESTIONS

Why
now?

WikiLeaks
published as soon as its verification and analysis were ready.

In
Febuary the Trump administration has issued an Executive Order
calling for a “Cyberwar” review to be prepared within 30 days.

While
the review increases the timeliness and relevance of the publication
it did not play a role in setting the publication date.

Redactions

Names,
email addresses and external IP addresses have been redacted in the
released pages (70,875 redactions in total) until further analysis is
complete.

  1. Over-redaction: Some
    items may have been redacted that are not employees, contractors,
    targets or otherwise related to the agency, but are, for example,
    authors of documentation for otherwise public projects that are used
    by the agency.

  2. Identity
    vs. person:
     the redacted names are replaced by user IDs
    (numbers) to allow readers to assign multiple pages to a single
    author. Given the redaction process used a single person may be
    represented by more than one assigned identifier but no identifier
    refers to more than one real person.

  3. Archive
    attachments (zip, tar.gz, …)
     are replaced with a PDF
    listing all the file names in the archive. As the archive content is
    assessed it may be made available; until then the archive is
    redacted.

  4. Attachments
    with other binary content
     are replaced by a hex dump of the
    content to prevent accidental invocation of binaries that may have
    been infected with weaponized CIA malware. As the content is
    assessed it may be made available; until then the content is
    redacted.

  5. The tens
    of thousands of routable IP addresses references
     (including
    more than 22 thousand within the United States) that correspond to
    possible targets, CIA covert listening post servers, intermediary
    and test systems, are redacted for further exclusive investigation.

  6. Binary
    files of non-public origin
     are only available as dumps to
    prevent accidental invocation of CIA malware infected binaries.

Organizational
Chart

The organizational
chart
 corresponds
to the material published by WikiLeaks so far.

Since
the organizational structure of the CIA below the level of
Directorates is not public, the placement of the EDG and its branches
within the org chart of the agency is reconstructed from information
contained in the documents released so far. It is intended to be used
as a rough outline of the internal organization; please be aware that
the reconstructed org chart is incomplete and that internal
reorganizations occur frequently.

Wiki
pages

Year
Zero” contains 7818 web pages with 943 attachments from the
internal development groupware. The software used for this purpose is
called Confluence, a proprietary software from Atlassian. Webpages in
this system (like in Wikipedia) have a version history that can
provide interesting insights on how a document evolved over time; the
7818 documents include these page histories for 1136 latest versions.

The
order of named pages within each level is determined by date (oldest
first). Page content is not present if it was originally dynamically
created by the Confluence software (as indicated on the
re-constructed page).

What
time period is covered?

The
years 2013 to 2016. The sort order of the pages within each level is
determined by date (oldest first).

WikiLeaks
has obtained the CIA’s creation/last modification date for each
page but these do not yet appear for technical reasons. Usually the
date can be discerned or approximated from the content and the page
order. If it is critical to know the exact time/date contact
WikiLeaks.

What
is “Vault 7”

Vault
7” is a substantial collection of material about CIA activities
obtained by WikiLeaks.

When
was each part of “Vault 7” obtained?

Part
one was obtained recently and covers through 2016. Details on the
other parts will be available at the time of publication.

Is
each part of “Vault 7” from a different source?

Details
on the other parts will be available at the time of publication.

What
is the total size of “Vault 7”?

The
series is the largest intelligence publication in history.

How
did WikiLeaks obtain each part of “Vault 7”?

Sources
trust WikiLeaks to not reveal information that might help identify
them.

Isn’t
WikiLeaks worried that the CIA will act against its staff to stop the
series?

No.
That would be certainly counter-productive.

Has
WikiLeaks already ‘mined’ all the best stories?

No.
WikiLeaks has intentionally not written up hundreds of impactful
stories to encourage others to find them and so create expertise in
the area for subsequent parts in the series. They’re there. Look.
Those who demonstrate journalistic excellence may be considered for
early access to future parts.

Won’t
other journalists find all the best stories before me?

Unlikely.
There are very considerably more stories than there are journalists
or academics who are in a position to write them.

WikiLeaks 

@wikileaks

RELEASE: Vault 7 Part 1 “Year Zero”: Inside the CIA’s global hacking force https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1 

By Tyler
Durden
 /
Republished with permission / 
Zero
Hedge
 / Report
a typo

=========================

Vanmorgen bracht Anti-Media het bericht, dat n.a.v. de laatste Wikileaks documenten geconcludeerd kan worden, dat de CIA heel goed mogelijk de bron kan zijn geweest voor het (hysterische) nepnieuws, waarin wordt gesteld dat Rusland achter het lekken van de Clinton mails en het manipuleren van de VS presidentsverkiezingen zou zitten………. Zie voor dat laatste ook: ‘CIA speelt zoals gewoonlijk vuil spel: uit Wikileaks documenten blijkt dat CIA zelf de verkiezingen manipuleerde, waar het Rusland van beschuldigde……..

Zie ook: ‘‘Russische bemoeienis’ met de Nederlandse verkiezingen….. Waaruit blijkt nu die manipulatie, gezien de verkiezingsuitslag?

        en: ‘CIA malware voor manipulaties en spionage >> vervolg Wikileaks Vault 7

        en: ‘Campagne Clinton, smeriger dan gedacht…………‘ (met daarin daarin opgenomen de volgende artikelen: ‘Donna Brazile Bombshell: ‘Proof’ Hillary ‘Rigged’ Primary Against Bernie‘ en ‘Democrats in Denial After Donna Brazile Says Primary Was Rigged for Hillary‘)

        en: ‘WikiLeaks: Seth Rich Leaked Clinton Emails, Not Russia

        en: ‘Hillary Clinton en haar oorlog tegen de waarheid…….. Ofwel een potje Rusland en Assange schoppen!

        en: ‘Murray, ex-ambassadeur van GB: de Russen hebben de VS verkiezingen niet gemanipuleerd

       en: ‘‘Russische manipulaties uitgevoerd’ door later vermoord staflid Clintons campagneteam Seth Rich……… AIVD en MIVD moeten hiervan weten!!

       en: ‘Obama gaf toe dat de DNC e-mails expres door de DNC werden gelekt naar Wikileaks….!!!!

       en: VS ‘democratie’ aan het werk, een onthutsende en uitermate humoristische video!

       en: ‘Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump

       en: ‘Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump……..

       en: ‘Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election

       en: ‘FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information

       en: ‘Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

       en: ‘Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

       en: ‘CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

       en: ‘Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..

       en: ‘Rusland zou onafhankelijkheid Californië willen uitlokken met reclame voor borsjt…….

       en: ‘Rusland zou onafhankelijkheid Californië willen uitlokken met reclame voor borsjt…….

       en: ‘Clinton te kakken gezet: Donna Brazile (Democratische Partij VS) draagt haar boek op aan Seth Rich, het vermoorde lid van DNC die belastende documenten lekte

       en: ‘Kajsa Ollongren (D66 vicepremier): Nederland staat in het vizier van Russische inlichtingendiensten……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘WannaCry niet door Noord-Korea ‘gelanceerd!’

       en:  ‘False flag terror’ bestaat wel degelijk: bekentenissen en feiten over heel smerige zaken……….

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.

Mijn excuus voor de belabberde vormgeving.

Facebook stelt ‘het geheel onafhankelijke en uiterst professionele’ NU.nl aan als ‘feitenchecker’, ofwel censuurorgaan… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Gistermiddag op BNR het bericht, dat Facebook NU.nl heeft aangewezen als ‘feitenchecker’, ofwel censuurorgaan voor nieuws op alternatieve media, ofwel ‘sociale media….’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

NU.nl, u weet wel het medium dat alle leugens uit de reguliere pers, zonder fatsoenlijke controle voor waar aanneemt en zelf ook publiceert, zie de berichtgeving over de bevrijding van Oost-Aleppo….. Of wat dacht u van wat men daar noemt ‘de annexatie van De Krim’, terwijl iedere imbeciel kan weten, dat de bevolking van De Krim, zich na een door internationale waarnemers goedgekeurd referendum, aansloot bij Rusland…….

Onder die bevolking was ook verreweg het grootste deel van de oorspronkelijke bevolking van De Krim voor aansluiting bij Rusland! Logisch, de bevolking van De Krim had voor het overgrote deel gekozen voor de democratisch gekozen president Janoekovytsj……. Deze werd afgezet middels een door de VS opgezette opstand, die vooropgezet leidde tot de staatsgreep in Oekraïne. De VS bekostigde het geheel met 4 miljard dollar en regisseerde de boel……. Net als de bevolking van Oost-Oekraïne, was de bevolking van De Krim tegen de neonazi-junta van de door de VS geparachuteerde corrupte grofgraaier Porosjenko…….

‘Nee echt een geweldig idee’, NU.nl feiten laten controleren’. laat dit medium eerst de eigen berichtgeving maar eens controleren!!

Trouwens wat is er eigenlijk zo betrouwbaar en sociaal, als het om Facebook gaat???

Zie ook: ‘Facebook en Google stellen Washington Post aan als ‘fact checker….’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Facebook gaat ‘nepnieuws’ (of: ‘fake news’) censureren………..

       en: ‘Kees Boonman ‘geheel onafhankelijk’: laten we even kijken naar het feit dat de Russen afluisteren, uh inbreken bij Het Torentje……… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht terug kan vinden.

Facebook gaat ‘nepnieuws’ (of: ‘fake news’) censureren………..

Vorige week al gemeld, maar toch nog maar even aandacht voor het volgende beste lezer: Facebook gaat nieuws laten checken door een aantal grote dagbladen* en als volgens minstens twee van deze dagbladen wordt gesteld dat e.e.a. niet op feiten berust, wordt er een aantekening bij het bericht gezet, dat het bericht ‘niet op feiten berust……’ Ook zullen deze berichten heel laag, of helemaal niet in de zoekresultaten terug te vinden zijn……….

Facebook is nu bezig de boel voor Frankrijk op poten te zetten, waar o.a. Le Monde als ‘fact checker’ is aangewezen, in Duitsland schijnt deze censuur volgens BNR (gistermiddag rond 16.37 u.) al te ‘werken….’ 

In de VS gaan onder andere de Washington Post (WaPo) en de New York Times berichten op feiten controleren……… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Terwijl dit groot-leveranciers zijn van nepnieuws!!! Neem de berichten over Russische hacks en beïnvloeding van de verkiezingen, geen snipper bewijs en toch houdt men deze leugen overeind…… 

Een vergelijkbare situatie wat betreft alle leugens (middels nepnieuws) die tot de grootste terreurdaad van deze eeuw heeft geleid: de illegale oorlog tegen Irak, begonnen door de VS (ook met Nederlandse steun en voorbereiding) die tot nu toe al meer dan 1,5 miljoen Irakezen het leven heeft gekost, inclusief een groot aantal kinderen en vrouwen!!! 

Overigens, BNR wist niet te melden, dat Google met hetzelfde bezig is*.

U begrijpt uiteraard dat alle nepnieuws, dat door de reguliere media wordt gebracht, niet gecensureerd zal worden……. RT (Russia Today) wordt keer op keer aangewezen als brenger van nepnieuws, terwijl men werkelijk niet één voorbeeld kan geven, dat dit bewijst……….. 

* Zie:

Google manipuleerde VS presidentsverkiezingen van 2016 en censureert niet alleen linkse/alternatieve sociale media

Zie ook:

Facebooks departement voor censuur: een hoognodige uitleg over een maatregel die alleen in een dictatuur thuishoort‘ (en zie de links in dat bericht over Facebook en Google)

Facebook en Google stellen Washington Post aan als ‘fact checker….’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Facebook stelt ‘het geheel onafhankelijke en uiterst professionele’ NU.nl aan als ‘feitenchecker’, ofwel censuurorgaan… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Kees Boonman ‘geheel onafhankelijk’: laten we even kijken naar het feit dat de Russen afluisteren, uh inbreken bij Het Torentje……… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, klik op één van de labels, die u onder dit bericht aantreft.