John Young wrote: > A PowerPoint presentation on H.O.P.E. was among the > latest:
Worth getting just for those sexy-hype-gifs alone... Surely it's "d4 \/\/4r3Z 3|V|p1R3" though. I'm afraid, anyway. Pesky punk terrorist paedophile piraters. Stop pointing your leet hacker death rays at me! > The HOPE program itself was not leaked, but perhaps will be > in the future. Mainly what a HOPE-rigged server does is > conceal a DIRT tracking and reporting bug in deliberately > publicized documents with snoop-appeal, called "dangles," > to ensnare the unwary and to trace the distribution of the > dangles as well as to assign an ID to every machine that > handles the docs. [...] > As anonymous noted, a fair amount of the material seems > designed to exploit the gullible, with a fully panoply of > security scare stories and promises of products to > deal with any wet dream of intelligence and law enforcement > for ballooning budgets and preparing plans for defending > against imaginary enemies. Pretty well emulating the > digital security market as if Codex was avidly reading > this list. Without dismissing the validity of the leaked code entirely... But an interesting proposition. Some quick thoughts on the possible origins and reasons for disclosure... Case 1; the archives are from an old repository of marketing bumph - a directory used by, say, Terrance "L" Knawles as a store for external yet confidential documents - press releases, financial reports, fancy slideshows and product demos. Possible sources are internal employees disgruntled by the company/management that have discovered old material, or morally-justified hackers playing Codex at their own game. The former is backed up by the reputation and public portrayal of Frank Jones, the latter by the (superficial, at least) seeming absence of technical presentation or knowledge in any of the witnessed documentation (again, I have not run the executables, so am reluctant to comment on them) or associated resources (see "website constructed by monkey on remote-access riddled Mac server"). Outcome - CDS discredited yet further, world saved. Case 2; the archives are from an old respository of since-expired and/or worthless and/or superceded documents, agreements, reports and programs. To stir up some business, CDS (ignoring possible Baiting tactics, although the irony is almost unbearable) decides to use the established information dissemination network to make DIRT and HOPE household names. After all, people buy things simply if they've heard a name before, no matter the context. In addition to increased sales and interest, CDS can monitor industry speculation as to current technology/possible implementations (of "bugs", HOPE, DIRT v3.0, etc) - minimal effort R&D, effectively. Outcome - HOPE becomes a reality in some aspects, or under some governments. Without further, more recent evidence, it is hard to have much faith in case 1. As a note, the apparent lack of "bugs" within released docs should not be taken for granted in any repetitions. I suspect CDS would have been watching the spread of the first lot with interest, bugged or not. Both technically and politically, little has been gained from the material seen. However, one would hope that the cat is partially out of the bag, and that material worthy of discussion would be released soon, to fly in the face of the powerpoint propaganda. Maybe it's time to dust off my video of "Hackers", jack-in to the cyberunderground and go hunt some orc.
