ACLU: Who are the watchers? At least 5,000 are alleged child pornographers, report finds

[Catherina]

ACLU Massachusetts ‏@ACLU_Mass 1m

#NSA RT @privacysos: Who are the watchers? At least 5,000 are alleged child pornographers, report finds http://bit.ly/139CIpj

Who are the watchers? At least 5,000 are alleged child pornographers, report finds

Submitted by sosadmin on Fri, 07/12/2013 - 13:58

NSA, FBI, CIA and private contractors have access to the private communications and associational information of hundreds of millions of people. Oversight is practically nonexistent. Seventy percent of the 'intelligence' budget is farmed out to private war and spy contractors, an industry that has been implicated in various obscene scandals over the years, among them the 'Afghanistan Butt Shots' crisis and torture lawsuits, to name just two.

Very rarely do we get a glimpse into the lives of the people who monitor us. It's a one way mirror, for the most part. But we do get some insights into this secretive world, and what we find can be horrific. One breathtaking federal investigation gives us plenty of reasons to worry about the people who sit behind monitors, headphones in, watching and listening in the shadows.

AP reports:

A major federal investigation has found that dozens of military officials and defense contractors, including some with top-level security clearances, allegedly bought and downloaded child pornography on private or government computers.

The Pentagon on Friday released investigative reports spanning almost a decade that implicated individuals working with agencies handling some of the nation's most closely guarded secrets, including the National Security Agency and the National Reconnaissance Office, which operates U.S. spy satellites.

Defense workers who purchased child porn put the Department of Defense, "the military and national security at risk by compromising computer systems, military installations and security clearances," a 2007 investigative report said.

The US government wants to capture Edward Snowden to prosecute him under the Espionage Act of 1917, so it no doubt took a hard line against intelligence community and DoD employees who downloaded child pornography on government machines, right?

Wrong!

Because none of the children in the images could be identified, as required for prosecution through the Federal system, the U.S. Attorney's Office declined to take action.

One case in California involved more than a dozen individuals with ties to the Defense Department, including contractors and active members of the military – several of whom had top secret clearances. At least nine cases were closed because investigators lacked "current, relevant evidence," the documents state.

Ok, maybe the US won't prosecute child pornographers in the military and intelligence institutions, but surely these are just a few bad apples, right?

Wrong again!

Because many important details are blacked out in the documents, it is impossible to determine precisely how many individuals with ties to the Pentagon were either charged with or suspected of receiving child pornography.

The federal investigation of military workers was part of a broader effort initiated in 2007 under the code name "Operation Flicker." That project had identified more than 5,000 individuals who subscribed to child pornography websites.

The surveillance state: even creepier than you ever could have imagined.

Permitted Distribution. Unless the specific web page from which ACLU of Massachusetts text materials is available indicates you may not do so, you may copy or distribute any text materials that appear on the ACLU of Massachusetts Site in print or digital format only

http://privacysos.org/node/1118

[DirkGently]

1. Yikes. The Hall Monitors have ...

... closets full of little shoes.

[Catherina]

3. This is disturbing on so many levels

The technology exists for extreme abuse. All we have is *trust* that webcams in our homes, xboxes, smart TVs, aren't being used against us. This just adds more ugly to it.

... A BBC Radio 5 live investigation found sites where hackers exchanged pictures and videos of people captured on their own webcams without their knowledge.

A police spokeswoman said webcam hackers would be prosecuted.

Commons Home Affairs Committee chairman Keith Vaz urged teachers to talk to pupils about the dangers of using webcams, and computer manufacturers to improve security for users.
...
The BBC Radio 5 live team found a thriving black market where access to compromised computers was bought and sold for a few pence.
...
Hackers are able to gain access to victims' computers using a piece of malicious software (malware) called a remote-access Trojan (Rat).

Many Rats now include a function allowing a hacker to access the victim's webcam without their knowledge.
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22967622

Webcam spying goes mainstream as Miss Teen USA describes hack
"The light didn't even go on, so I had no idea."

by Nate Anderson - Aug 16 2013, 4:40pm CAST




Wolf detailing her experience.
CNN/WPIX

Webcam hacking has officially gone mainstream with yesterday's revelation that the new Miss Teen USA, Cassidy Wolf, was the victim of a "sextortion" plot in which someone slipped Remote Administration Tool (RAT) software onto her computer and used it to snap (apparently nude) pictures of Wolf in her room. "I wasn’t aware that somebody was watching me (on my webcam)," she told The Today Show. "The light (on the camera) didn’t even go on, so I had no idea."

Wolf said that the hacker tried to extort her, threatening to release the pictures publicly if she didn't follow his demands. The FBI has admitted that it is investigating the case and eventually said that has identified a suspect.

The story itself isn't remarkable—indeed, earlier this year I documented an entire community of RAT users who gather to share tips and pictures of the "slaves" whose machines they have infected—but these kinds of sextortion plots have to date been covered largely in the tech press and in local papers. (Though GQ ran a fine story on sextortionist Luis Mijangos in early 2012 that's well worth a read). Wolf has now taken the story onto the morning TV talk shows, and her interviewers appear to be amazed that such hacks are even possible.

In doing interviews this week for my new book, The Internet Police, many of the questions have focused on sextortion and the use of RAT software. These hacks are such a profound privacy violation—accessing webcams, microphones, and stored files provides the attacker with almost unfettered access to one's private life, thoughts, documents, even conversations—that they routinely generate amazement in interlocutors. As one TV host put it after hearing Wolf's story this week, "Just—wow, that is creepy... Can you believe that?" Or, as a Jezebel writer put it today, "webcam hacking—WHICH I CANNOT BELIEVE IS A REAL THING OH MY GOD."

...

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/08/webcam-spying-goes-mainstream-as-miss-teen-usa-describes-hack/

[hootinholler]

4. Indeed. Many many levels. n/t

[laundry_queen]

14. I'm still amazed people have no idea how easy or prevalent this is

on the news here in Canada, they had a little piece on how easy it was to hack into not only your webcam, but the microphone in your laptop and smartphone as well. Their tech guy showed how on tv. Of course Apple and Microsoft immediately stated how they have since fixed that 'security breach' but realistically, how long before there's another (hint: it's probably happened already). They also showed how to hack into a car system. People here at DU who deny it could happen are seriously misinformed or in denial. I guess the CBC is now a paulbot too.

[pnwmom]

17. THIS is a very serious problem, but it has nothing to do with the NSA

except that both involve abuse of computer technology.

We absolutely have to do better with this. A great deal better.

[questionseverything]

36. as far as we know

so far anyways

[xocet]

23. This sort of thing has been going on for a while. Here is a related story from 2010.

School Webcam snapped 'partially undressed' kid
New motion in the Lower Merion School District laptop Webcam-spying case alleges that thousands of images were secretly captured, including intimate images of students off campus.
by Chris Matyszczyk April 16, 2010 12:49 PM PDT

A new motion in the Lower Merion School School District Webcam-spying case has presented extraordinary suggestions as to the frequency and intimate nature of the photographs allegedly taken remotely by the cameras on school-issued laptops.

On Thursday, lawyers for 15-year-old Blake Robbins and his family claimed that thousands of images were taken by the laptop Webcams. Included in these were, according to the motion, "pictures of Blake partially undressed and of Blake sleeping." In addition, images of Web sites visited and snapshots of their instant messages were also allegedly captured.

According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, lawyers claim that each time the LANRev software took Webcam shots, it sent them back to school district servers, where employees found entertainment in "a little LMSD soap opera."

Two school district employees were placed on administrative leave in March, after the allegations surfaced, and the school agreed to immediately turn off the Webcams.

...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-20002697-71.html

The conclusion of this case is as follows:

Lower Merion district's laptop saga ends with $610,000 settlement

By John P. Martin, Inquirer Staff Writer
Posted: October 12, 2010

The Lower Merion School District will pay $610,000 to settle lawsuits over its tracking of student laptop computers, ending an eight-month saga that thrust the elite district into a global spotlight and stirred questions about technology and privacy in schools.

School board members voted unanimously Monday night to pay $185,000 to the two students who claimed the district spied on them by secretly activating the webcams on their laptops.

The bulk of the money, $175,000, will be put in trust for Blake Robbins, the Harriton High School junior whose family brought the issue to light in February. Jalil Hasan, who filed his lawsuit this summer after graduating from Lower Merion High School, will receive $10,000.

The district will also pay $425,000 in legal fees to their attorney, Mark S. Haltzman.

...

http://articles.philly.com/2010-10-12/news/24981536_1_laptop-students-district-several-million-dollars

[pnwmom]

8. Dozens of the hall monitors have been implicated -- which is bad enough.

But 5,000 -- no. That's a reading comprehension error.

[bemildred]

2. Rules are for the proles. nt

[pnwmom]

5. Would you please change your title? There were dozens involved, not 5,000.

Not to minimize the fact that child pornography is a serious problem that should be prosecuted wherever it's found.

(And I realize the first person to confuse the numbers was the ACLU person who twittered.)

However, the article is not saying that 5,000 individuals charged with security were involved with child pornography. It's saying that it found dozens of such individuals when conducting a larger study involving 5,000 subscribers to porn websites.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/pentagon-child-porn-scand_n_656839.html

"A major federal investigation has found that dozens of military officials and defense contractors, including some with top-level security clearances, allegedly bought and downloaded child pornography on private or government computers."

"Because many important details are blacked out in the documents, it is impossible to determine precisely how many individuals with ties to the Pentagon were either charged with or suspected of receiving child pornography.

"The federal investigation of military workers was part of a broader effort initiated in 2007 under the code name 'Operation Flicker.' That project had identified more than 5,000 individuals who subscribed to child pornography websites."

[Catherina]

28. I'm going to leave it with the original title but you bring up a different good point.

The 5000 were all federal employees from the DOD, NSA, CIA who registered on child porn websites using their government email addresses or APO and FPO zip codes. Out of about 1500 who downloaded child porn (in addition to viewing it), only about 200 of those were prosecuted and most of the charges were dropped. The several dozen you're pointing out were just from one case in California, not the larger operation.

I don't have the ACLU's resources or what other information they used but, based on just the information in the OP, I agree the title could use some work besides the numbers are unclear.

As you pointed out

"Because many important details are blacked out in the documents, it is impossible to determine precisely how many individuals with ties to the Pentagon were either charged with or suspected of receiving child pornography.

There's also this that explains that the 5000 paid money to access child porn websites operated overseas.

Many of those apprehended were swept up in a much broader probe initiated by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency in 2006. Operation Flicker identified an estimated 5,000 people who had paid money over the Internet to access websites operated overseas. But until now, it has not been disclosed that a sizable number of cases were referred to the Defense Department for investigation because they involved military personnel, intelligence officials, or defense contractors….

At least two of the cases were contractors with top secret clearances at the National Security Agency, which eavesdrops on foreign communications, according to the documents. When one of the contractors was indicted two years ago, he fled the country and is believed to be hiding in Libya, according to a summary of the investigation from last year. The other was sentenced in 2008 to more than five years in prison and lifetime probation….

"Some are in high-ranking positions, in positions of trust," said John Sheehan, executive director of the exploited child division at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which has been consulted on many of these cases and has reviewed 36 million images of alleged child pornography since 2002 at the request of law enforcement agencies. "There isn't a profile or stereotype, which makes it even more challenging for law enforcement."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/07/23/pentagon_workers_tied_to_child_porn/

Out of those 5000, how many of them were "watchers"? I think that's where you have a point and the title messes up unless by watcher they mean more than people who work in surveillance.

[pnwmom]

29. Your title is wrong because it falsely implies that all 5000 are FBI, CIA, NSA,

or private security contractors -- which is not at all supported by the articles you've posted.

According to the reports, there were dozens of cases involving security people, not 5000,
including something more than a dozen in the California case alone.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/pentagon-child-porn-scand_n_656839.html

WASHINGTON -- A major federal investigation has found that dozens of military officials and defense contractors, including some with top-level security clearances, allegedly bought and downloaded child pornography on private or government computers.

snip


"One case in California involved more than a dozen individuals with ties to the Defense Department, including contractors and active members of the military – several of whom had top secret clearances."

___________________________________


And on what do you base your claim that:

“The 5000 were all federal employees from the DOD, NSA, CIA who registered on child porn websites using their government email addresses or APO and FPO zip codes.”

The document you quoted from says:

“Operation Flicker identified an estimated 5,000 people who had paid money over the Internet to access websites operated overseas. But until now, it has not been disclosed that a sizable number of cases were referred to the Defense Department for investigation because they involved military personnel, intelligence officials, or defense contractors.”

So, about 5,000 paid to access those websites, and some unknown “sizable” number were military personnel (most of whom are not involved in surveillance activities), intelligence officials, or defense contractors. This doesn’t support your claim.

What actually happened, is that they took the list of 5,000 who had been associated with a child porn website, and then cross-checked it with lists of military personnel and other Federal employees, and came up with some unreported number. And only a fraction of these federal employees are "watchers" engaged in surveillance. So the ACLU tweet was completely overblown.

Again, I'm not excusing ANY people being involved in child porn. But the number of security people caught in Operation Flicker was just a small fraction of the 5000 on their list.

[Catherina]

31. You should contact the ACLU directly. Maybe they'll be able to straighten it all out for you. n/t

[pnwmom]

32. You shouldn't add to the chain of false information

by broadcasting claims that you now know aren't true.

I fully support an active debate about NSA surveillance and reining them in. However, engaging in hyperbole and exaggeration weakens the cause; it doesn't strengthen it.

[Catherina]

33. Like I said, contact the ACLU. You seem confused about the various operations

and how they were mishandled over the years, with very few people even investigated because it was such a hot potato.

First you started off that it was only dozens, which was a reading comprehension error on your part. Now you're moving the goalposts, after I conceded a different point you're now latching onto about lack of clarity and calling all 5000 watchers. It's tiresome and a waste of time.

[pnwmom]

34. Nothing you cited says it was more than dozens. n/t

[bunnies]

6. WTF?!

I dont even know what to say.

[pnwmom]

7. Out of 5,000 people who had downloaded child porn, "dozens" turned out to be security people.

Of course not a single one should have been a person charged with security, but "dozens" does not equal 5,000.

Not to be picky . ..

[bunnies]

10. phew. ok.

The one time I didnt read the article... Thanks.

[pnwmom]

11. The ACLU person who sent the original twitter obviously didn't either.

It happens.

[Triana]

9. Good heavens.

[cantbeserious]

13. Can Your Data Be Safe When The Watchers Partake Of Child Pornography

eom

[pnwmom]

15. Certainly not if the data consists of child pornography.

They'll steal it for sure.

[HardTimes99]

16. USA! USA! USA! :sarcasm: in case it's needed - nt

[East Coast Pirate]

18. Another problem is that porn sites

of any kind are notorious for being loaded with spyware. I can't believe someone would be watching porn on a secure computer.

[pnwmom]

19. Presumably the dozens of "watchers" (not 5,000) were watching from home computers,

not work computers.

[East Coast Pirate]

21. The OP says it was done on work computers as well.

A major federal investigation has found that dozens of military officials and defense contractors, including some with top-level security clearances, allegedly bought and downloaded child pornography on private or government computers.

[pnwmom]

22. You're right. Thank you for pointing that out. I was fixated on the words

"dozens of military officials and defense contractors" -- which is so much smaller than the number 5,000.



Obviously, anyone who views child porn from work is unbelievably stupid as well as evil.

[East Coast Pirate]

24. Evil goes without saying.

Reckless and extremely stupid and yet allowed access to classified information is yet another huge problem.

[bemildred]

25. I used to be sysadmin on defense contractor networks.

Back in the 80s and 90s. I was kind of stunned at what I saw at first. Not everybody mind you, and not just kiddie porn, but it was there. Things may have tightened up. I don't think I'll go into it further than that.

[tblue37]

26. Besides the repulsive, evil creepiness of child pornography,

those who are viewing it are also setting themselves up to be blackmailed by any enemy who knows about their behavior, which means that they would probably reveal any sensitive info they might know about, just to avoid being exposed as the perverts they are.

[malaise]

27. You cannot privatize national security

Ah well - this is disgusting

[sabrina 1]

30. Exactly, but they have. And there's big money in the 'security' business. And I think that is the

reason for all the panic to silence Whistle Blowers. The whole 'security' issue has become a money-making racket. We have former CEOs of multi-billion dollar corporations, like Clapper, moving straight from their Corporate jobs into Government 'security' positions, and then most likely, after securing more funding from Congress, back to their former 'business'.

The real scandal imo, will be when the whole scam is revealed. So far, the spying on millions of Americans makes no sense, unless all the data collecting is for Big Business, then it makes sense.

'Terror' has been one of the best sales pitches ever, and I don't think they are about to give up the profits without a huge fight.

We know our government doesn't react to War Crimes or Torture, or Wall St. crimes. And when Whistle Blowers expose those crimes, nothing happens, except to the Whistle Blower. Money is the only thing that appears to get their attention. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that very little of this has to do with 'National Security'.

[malaise]

35. Very well said

Sad but true

[marions ghost]

41. I support your view

this is the real story.

[Rex]

37. Yeah following the 'disaster capitalism' model of governing

got us to this point. You wouldn't think it couldn't go any lower. But it does.

[malaise]

38. I know

It's frightening

[WinkyDink]

40. Au contraire, mon ami.

[TransitJohn]

39. You may want to edit thread title for clarity

As it's written, you're saying 5000 of them manufacture child pornography. Maybe 'consumers of child pornography'?

[Zorra]

42. "suspects also put the Defense Department "at risk of blackmail, bribery, and threats,"

Well, isn't that special?