counterintelligence

Vladimir Putin and the Russian propaganda campaigns unsealed by the DOJ

In the digital age, the line between fact and fiction is often blurred, and nowhere is this more dangerous than in the realm of political influence. The power to shape narratives, sway public opinion, and manipulate democratic processes is no longer just the domain of politicians and pundits β€” it’s a high-stakes game involving shadowy operatives, shell companies, and an arsenal of disinformation tools. The latest indictments from the Department of Justice expose the scale of Russian propaganda campaigns to reveal just how deeply this game is rigged against us.

At the heart of this operation is a well-oiled propaganda machine, targeting the fault lines of American society β€” free speech, immigration, and even our national pastime of online gaming. And in the backdrop of these revelations looms the 2024 presidential election, a moment ripe for manipulation by foreign actors with the singular goal of deepening our divisions. While these efforts may feel like the plot of a dystopian thriller, they are all too real, with disinformation campaigns working to tilt the scales of democracy in favor of authoritarianism.

Last week, the Department of Justice released a treasure trove of indictments and accompanying information about the depth and breadth of the still ongoing Russian influence campaigns raging in the US and elsewhere — with a particular focus on sowing discord ahead of the US 2024 elections. Let’s take a look at the major pillars of the DOJ’s work.

RT employees and right-wing influencers indicted

On September 3, 2024, the Department of Justice filed an indictment of two Russian nationals, Kostiantyn Kalashnikov and Elena Afanasyeva, for covertly funding a Tennessee-based content creation company that published videos promoting Russian interests. According to the indictment, they funneled nearly $10 million through shell companies to spread pro-Russian propaganda and disinformation on U.S. social media platforms. The defendants posed as U.S.-based editors, directing content that amplified domestic divisions and supported Russian government narratives. Both are charged with conspiracy to violate the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and money laundering.

Although not specifically named, there are enough uniquely identifying clues in the document to identify the content company in the scheme as Tenet Media, a company run by married couple Liam Donovan and Lauren Chen — herself a prominent “conservative” commentator associated with Glenn Beck‘s The Blaze and Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA. The six commentators who were being paid exorbitantly by the Russians for their content (as much as $100,000 per video) — all of whom, improbably, claim to have been duped — are Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, and Benny Johnson, Tayler Hansen, Matt Christiansen, and Lauren Southern. All are outspoken Trump supporters, and are on record parroting Russian talking points despite claiming the work was wholly their own.

Continue reading Russian propaganda campaigns exposed by the DOJ in a slew of indictments
Read more

who owns twitter elon musk and others

The social network formerly known as Twitter, now known as X, has been through some things — including a rocky change of ownership 2 years ago. At the time, the person who owns Twitter on paper was known to be tech billionaire and then-world’s richest man Elon Musk — but it was not fully known who was included in the full shadowy list of Twitter investors.

Thanks apparently to some terrible lawyering, the full list of Twitter investors via parent company X Corp has been unsealed during discovery for a legal case against Musk relating to non-payment of severance for employees he laid off after buying the company. In addition to the known in 2022 list below, we can now augment the Twitter investors list with more detail:

  • Bill Ackman
  • Marc Andreesen — legendary tech investor and general partner at Andreessen Horowitz, known for his techno-accelerationist views
  • Joe Lonsdale — cofounder of Palantir with shadowy tech billionaire Peter Thiel, the primary financial backer of Trump’s VP pick JD Vance
  • Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal
  • Jack Dorsey — one of the original founders of Twitter
  • Larry Ellison
  • Ross Gerber
  • Doug Leone
  • Michael Moritz
  • Changpeng Zhao

Security analyst and intelligence professional Eric Garland notes that beyond the notable billionaires on the list, the investor sheet can be largely read as “fronts for the dictatorships of Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, and others.” Tech pioneer turned investigative journalist Dave Troy’s take on the Twitter investor list reveal is that it shows “this platform is an instrument of information warfare.”

Continue reading Who owns Twitter (X)? [2024 update]
Read more

The concept of a “honeypot” in the realms of cybersecurity and information warfare is a fascinating and complex one, straddling the line between deception and defense. At its core, a honeypot is a security mechanism designed to mimic systems, data, or resources to attract and detect unauthorized users or attackers, essentially acting as digital bait. By engaging attackers, honeypots serve multiple purposes: they can distract adversaries from more valuable targets, gather intelligence on attack methods, and help in enhancing security measures.

Origins and Usage

The use of honeypots dates back to the early days of computer networks, evolving significantly with the internet‘s expansion. Initially, they were simple traps set to detect anyone probing a network. However, as cyber threats grew more sophisticated, so did honeypots, transforming into complex systems designed to emulate entire networks, applications, or databases to lure in cybercriminals.

A honeypot illustration with a circuit board beset by a bee, by Midjourney

Honeypots are used by a variety of entities, including corporate IT departments, cybersecurity firms, government agencies, and even individuals passionate about cybersecurity. Their versatility means they can be deployed in almost any context where digital security is a concern, from protecting corporate data to safeguarding national security.

Types and purposes

There are several types of honeypots, ranging from low-interaction honeypots, which simulate only the services and applications attackers might find interesting, to high-interaction honeypots, which are complex and fully-functional systems designed to engage attackers more deeply. The type chosen depends on the specific goals of the deployment, whether it’s to gather intelligence, study attack patterns, or improve defensive strategies.

In the context of information warfare, honeypots serve as a tool for deception and intelligence gathering. They can be used to mislead adversaries about the capabilities or intentions of a state or organization, capture malware samples, and even identify vulnerabilities in the attacker’s strategies. By analyzing the interactions attackers have with these traps, defenders can gain insights into their techniques, tools, and procedures (TTPs), enabling them to better anticipate and mitigate future threats.

Historical effects

Historically, honeypots have had significant impacts on both cybersecurity and information warfare. They’ve led to the discovery of new malware strains, helped dismantle botnets, and provided critical intelligence about state-sponsored cyber operations. For example, honeypots have been instrumental in tracking the activities of sophisticated hacking groups, leading to a deeper understanding of their targets and methods, which, in turn, has informed national security strategies and cybersecurity policies.

One notable example is the GhostNet investigation, which uncovered a significant cyber espionage network targeting diplomatic and governmental institutions worldwide. Honeypots played a key role in identifying the malware and command-and-control servers used in these attacks, highlighting the effectiveness of these tools in uncovering covert operations.

Honeypot hackers and cybercriminals

Ethical and practical considerations

While the benefits of honeypots are clear, their deployment is not without ethical and practical considerations. There’s a fine line between deception for defense and entrapment, raising questions about the legality and morality of certain honeypot operations, especially in international contexts where laws and norms may vary widely.

Moreover, the effectiveness of a honeypot depends on its believability and the skill with which it’s deployed and monitored. Poorly configured honeypots might not only fail to attract attackers but could also become liabilities, offering real vulnerabilities to be exploited.

Cyber attackers and defenders

Honeypots are a critical component of the cybersecurity and information warfare landscapes, providing valuable insights into attacker behaviors and tactics. They reflect the ongoing cat-and-mouse game between cyber attackers and defenders, evolving in response to the increasing sophistication of threats. As digital technologies continue to permeate all aspects of life, the strategic deployment of honeypots will remain a vital tactic in the arsenal of those looking to protect digital assets and information. Their historical impacts demonstrate their value, and ongoing advancements in technology promise even greater potential in understanding and combating cyber threats.

By serving as a mirror to the tactics and techniques of adversaries, honeypots help illuminate the shadowy world of cyber warfare, making them indispensable tools for anyone committed to safeguarding information in an increasingly interconnected world.

Read more

Malware, short for “malicious software,” is any software intentionally designed to cause damage to a computer, server, client, or computer network. This cybersecurity threat encompasses a variety of software types, including viruses, worms, trojan horses, ransomware, spyware, adware, and more. Each type has a different method of infection and damage.

Who uses malware and what for

Malware is utilized by a wide range of actors, from amateur hackers to sophisticated cybercriminals, and even nation-states. The motives can vary greatly:

  • Cybercriminals often deploy malware to steal personal, financial, or business information, which can be used for financial gain through fraud or direct theft.
  • Hacktivists use malware to disrupt services or bring attention to political or social causes.
  • Nation-states and state-sponsored actors might deploy sophisticated malware for espionage and intelligence, to gain strategic advantage, sabotage, or influence geopolitical dynamics.
Malware, illustrated by DALL-E 3

Role in disinformation and geopolitical espionage

Malware plays a significant role in disinformation campaigns and geopolitical espionage. State-sponsored actors might use malware to infiltrate the networks of other nations, steal sensitive information (hacked emails perhaps?), and manipulate or disrupt critical infrastructure. In terms of disinformation, malware can be used to gain unauthorized access to media outlets or social media accounts, spreading false information to influence public opinion or destabilize political situations.

Preventing malware

Preventing malware involves multiple layers of security measures:

  • Educate Users: The first line of defense is often the users themselves. Educating them about the dangers of phishing emails, not to click on suspicious links, and the importance of not downloading or opening files from unknown sources can significantly reduce the risk of malware infections.
  • Regular Software Updates: Keeping all software up to date, including operating systems and antivirus programs, can protect against known vulnerabilities that malware exploits.
  • Use Antivirus Software: A robust antivirus program can detect and remove many types of malware. Regular scans and real-time protection features are crucial.
  • Firewalls: Both hardware and software firewalls can block unauthorized access to your network, which can help prevent malware from spreading.
  • Backups: Regularly backing up important data ensures that, in the event of a malware attack, the lost data can be recovered without paying ransoms or losing critical information.

Famous malware incidents in foreign affairs

Several high-profile malware incidents have had significant implications in the realm of foreign affairs:

  • Stuxnet: Discovered in 2010, Stuxnet was a highly sophisticated worm that targeted supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems and was believed to be designed to damage Iran’s nuclear program. It is widely thought to be a cyberweapon developed by the United States and Israel, though neither has confirmed involvement.
  • WannaCry: In May 2017, the WannaCry ransomware attack affected over 200,000 computers across 150 countries, with the UK’s National Health Service, Spain’s TelefΓ³nica, FedEx, and Deutsche Bahn among those impacted. The attack exploited a vulnerability in Microsoft Windows, and North Korea was widely blamed for the attack.
  • NotPetya: Initially thought to be ransomware, NotPetya emerged in 2017 and caused extensive damage, particularly in Ukraine. It later spread globally, affecting businesses and causing billions of dollars in damages. It is believed to have been a state-sponsored attack originating from Russia, designed as a geopolitical tool under the guise of ransomware.
  • SolarWinds: Uncovered in December 2020, the SolarWinds hack was a sophisticated supply chain attack that compromised the Orion software suite used by numerous US government agencies and thousands of private companies. It allowed the attackers, believed to be Russian state-sponsored, to spy on the internal communications of affected organizations for months.

In conclusion, malware is a versatile and dangerous tool in the hands of cybercriminals and state actors alike, used for everything from financial theft to sophisticated geopolitical maneuvers. The proliferation of malware in global affairs underscores the need for robust cybersecurity practices at all levels, from individual users to national governments. Awareness, education, and the implementation of comprehensive security measures are key to defending against the threats posed by malware.

Read more

Project Lakhta is the internal name for the disinformation operation that Yevgeniy Prigozhin‘s Internet Research Agency is running to interfere in elections across the Western world, according to the Robert Mueller indictments relating to the Russian attacks on the 2016 election.

The op included/includes bots on social media, fake influencers, paid crisis actors, massive propaganda, financial fraud, old-fashioned spying, and more. There is no evidence this operation has ceased its activities — indeed what would be the incentive, following such Great Success??

In fact, prosecutions are still ongoing.

Project Lakhta and the Internet Research Agency: Russia's troll factory

History of Project Lakhta

Project Lakhta was a covert operation ordered by Russian president Vladimir Putin with the goal of interfering in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The interference aimed to harm the campaign of Hillary Clinton, boost the candidacy of Donald Trump, and increase political and social discord in the United States. The Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian troll farm, created thousands of social media accounts to support radical political groups and promote events in support of Trump and against Clinton. The operation also involved computer hackers affiliated with the Russian military intelligence service infiltrating information systems of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign officials, then publicly releasing the stolen files and emails. The U.S. intelligence community, the FBI, and the Senate and House Intelligence Committees conducted investigations into the matter. These investigations concluded that Russian interference was “sweeping and systematic” and “violated U.S. criminal law”, but there was insufficient evidence to bring any conspiracy or coordination charges against Trump or his associates (​1​).

Scale of Project Lakhta

In 2018 a Russian national, Elena Khusyaynova, was charged with being a key member of Project Lakhta. Khusyaynova served as the chief accountant of the operation and managed its financial aspects, including paying off Russian political activists posing as U.S. citizens, advertising on social media platforms, and promoting news postings on social networks. Between 2016 and 2018, Project Lakhta’s expenses exceeded $35 million and its operating budget was over $10 million. The operation allegedly involved the creation of thousands of fake social media accounts to aggravate political groups and create divides before the election. The charges were unsealed in Alexandria, Virginia, emphasizing that the complaint does not allege that Khusyaynova or the broader conspiracy had any effect on the outcome of an election. In response to these meddling efforts and a recent data breach, Facebook is reportedly seeking to acquire a major cybersecurity firm to enhance its security measures (​2​).

Read more

The FBI took the extraordinary step of initiating a counterintelligence investigation into the President of the United States, based according to the New York Times on the firing of James Comey and Trump‘s public actions surrounding that event, in which he linked the firing to the Russia investigation vociferously several times.

This is a historical first.

Hold on to your hats.

Read more