- cross-posted to:
- usa@midwest.social
- cross-posted to:
- usa@midwest.social
You must log in or register to comment.
Whether or not you think he should be jailed for leaking CIA secrets, the dude had child porn. He deserved a serious sentence because he expressed zero remorse for that. Along those lines he couldn’t even fucking pretend to have leaked the state secrets for any other reason than the CIA was a shitty place to work. You gotta play the fucking game if you’re gonna fuck with the government. You can’t just be a crusty old coder.
“Furman said Schulte continued his crimes from behind bars … by creating a hidden file on his computer that contained 2,400 images of child sexual abuse that he continued to view from jail.”
How do you get 2.4k images on a jail computer? Manifest it out of thin air?
Considering CIA is involved, which is known for torture, human experimentation, poisonings, planted evidence, etc. I’d not be too surprised if that file was straight up planted as an extra “fuck you” to the guy.
That was never part of his defense. Do you think the CIA colluded with him and his lawyer to accept responsibility for the material the CIA planted to sandbag his sentence? I feel like an innocent person would be screaming that. Hell, even possibly innocent/possibly guilty folks do.
Edit: here’s a quote about the material you’re defending:
Schulte called the child pornography he was accused of possessing a “victimless crime”
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/06/13/the-surreal-case-of-a-cia-hackers-revenge
The sentence previous to the one you’re quoting, the one you’ve omitted, changes the context quite a lot.
When he heard that the government was pushing to keep him detained pending trial, his stomach dropped. “The crime I am charged with is in fact a non-violent, victimless crime,”
In the US a person pending trial can be either released or kept detained. (18 U.S. Code § 3142 - Release or detention of a defendant pending trial) In cases when the defendant is being charged with non-violent crimes, it’s fairly common for them to be released until their trial. Possibly on bond.
The wording of his statement is… questionable. But in this context, it could be re-worded to something like “you’re are accusing me of possession of illegal material, which is not a violent crime. I was not involved in creation of said material, therefore there are no victims of mine”.
Anyway, even if he did have the material in question, the fact that they report finding some on a jail computer is awful weird. Those aren’t, exactly, known for having unrestricted and unmonitored access to the internet. I, also, would be surprised if those computers are less locked down than school or library computers, which tend to restrict users’ permissions to the bare minimum, often as far as prohibiting creation of files.
Apologies. I copied the quote from his Wikipedia article. The other sentences I left out included him potentially assaulting a drunk roommate and the decade+ of evidence covering his interest in CSAM. That really changes your context quite a bit, no?
Still waiting for you to produce evidence of his defense about it all being the CIA. You’re really focused on the poor wording of a single news report covering his case and you’re missing the preponderance of evidence.
Edit: you really defended someone who claimed that CSAM was a victimless crime. What the fuck.
I merely pointed out that in the context, his statement was, most likely, not trying to claim that CSAM is a victimless crime, but that his alleged possession of it is.
Substitute CSAM for something like murder, for example: It’s one thing to have a video of someone committing murder and a very different thing to commit murder yourself and record it. One is, obviously, a violent crime; the other, not so much. It’s a similar argument here.
He might be 100% guilty, he might not be. I don’t know for sure. What I do know for sure, is that CIA and other alphabet agencies have a history of being… less than honest and moral. So, I exercise caution and take their statements with a fair bit of skepticism. Pardon me of that doesn’t come off as I intend it to.
CIA: “yeah let’s put this 2.4k images of child porn at his computer and he will be fucked muahahahaha 😈😈”
Seems like something the CIA definitely would do.
Specially if someone leak their “precious secrets”
CIA can cobble together questionable evidence against an entire country, proving the US administration with more reasons to start a “preventive war”. A war which would eventually end with “whoopsie-daisy, there are no WMDs after all”.
Yet, planting evidence on a single guy who just leaked a whole bunch of their secrets? No, of course they’d never do anything questionable or immoral to him!
I think one of the things that inflate image counts like that is that if there is a video of child porn, each individual frame of the video is counted as a single image. If he downloaded a 40 second, 60 FPS video, that’s 2.4k images right there.
This is why it’s more interesting when they mention total size in gigabytes of whatever, because image data has a maximum compression size but “raw number of images” is completely made up and could be a single file even when in the tens ouf thousands (still bad of course but you get my point)
Holy shit, they really buried the lede with that headline. For sure, throw away the key.
I don’t know about you guys, but I don’t really trust the word of the CIA on those things. Or anything, really.
Why does the CIA have a trove of child porn?
Leverage.
…
Drugs -> Money
Sex -> Control the Powerful
Plumbers protect the CIA.
It’s always big pipe isn’t it
Wet works. Always in demand.
To prove the charges. There have been enough cases of “she looks too young to be 18” where they were, in fact, 18. This database (which I thought was actually run by the FBI, but whatever) let’s them show that the images were of Jane Roe, born May 5 1996, and the images/material were produced between 2008-2010.
IOW, to provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt that they were underage.
What happened to the guy who staged a coup to overthrow the government? Remember where all those psychos with guns wailed on cops with flagpoles and shit on the walls and stuff, and that lady planted bombs by the RNC office? Remember that? What happened to that guy?
Oh nothing?
Oh.
Huh.
I wouldn’t say nothing, as he might become the next US president
(if the world is unlucky)
He chilled with Epstein and raped some kids just like many Democrats. Part of the elite pedo ring.
What was your point again?
We get it, that’s why you like him.
I don’t like people in Pedo rape circles like the Republicans or Democrats. Do you?
Yes yes both sides, that’s why you jumped in to eagerly start screeching whataboutisms.
You were all in your fun circle pretending it was only Donald Trump doing Pedo activities.
Then you had to face the reality that both Democrats and Republicans are plenty on Epstein’s list that he made before he accidentally slipped on a banana peel in prison
I wonder how many of the gaping security holes in softwares and systems he reported have since been patched that otherwise would have left to doors wide open for hackers?
As long as governments hoard security vulnerabilities, they are endangering security, safety, life and property of millions of people.
NSA accidentally leaking eternal blue lol
They take the man’s entire life away because he revealed us terrible things our non-elected leaders are doing to us. Who was hurt by his actions?
They take the man’s entire life away because he revealed us terrible things our non-elected leaders are doing to us.
And for possessing child porn…
Furman said Schulte continued his crimes from behind bars by trying to leak more classified materials and by creating a hidden file on his computer that contained 2,400 images of child sexual abuse that he continued to view from jail.
Holy crap, dude was even watching child porn in prison. Clearly the CIA is hiring the cream of the crop.
It wouldn’t be far fetched that they put that themselves.
Except the part where he was quoted saying that it was a victimless crime. Ick
Yeah, it’s fairly insane. You’d think he would have denied it, got everyone in an uproar, maybe made a bid for appeal.
NOPE
And if you’ll buy that, I’ll throw the Golden Gate in free
Need to read the article man, He unapologetically had cp
How many bridges you want?
i prefer bridges on my bridges. They often build up walkways for inspectors over tricky areas the crane’s can’t reach
Giving away methods for hacking/spying ensures your country is at a disadvantage.
Disclosing found exploits allows developers to patch them out and improve security of everyone, which includes all the other alphabet boys and regular citizens.
There’s no way to know that you’re the only one who found any given exploit. Letting an exploit stay unpatched opens up an attack vector for everyone, not just you.Disclosing found exploits to the development team is far different than exposing those exploits to unfriendly countries or in this case those that would expose state secrets.
It also enables innocent people to be protected from foreign governments.
Tune extent yes, but it also makes us all more secure. Even if you think our own government is doing a good job all the other governments have these holes too.
must be nice not having to understand things
“We will likely never know the full extent of the damage, but I have no doubt it was massive,” Judge Jesse M. Furman said as he announced the sentence.
Schulte was responsible for “the most damaging disclosures of classified information in American history.”
he got people killed, and you don’t care
Please add citations where people were killed as a direct result
Realistically, it’s doubtful anybody died directly because of that particular leak.
Probably the shutting down of the phone reading methods could eventually compromise operations. It probably cost them money and a great deal of time which could totally have an impact on somebody’s life. But that’s how espionage works.
I kind of get that you have to keep your secrets secret. And there need to be repercussions for leaking secrets. Especially trade secrets like this. If not for the CP stuff I would think 5 or 10 years would have been a more reasonable number.
But with the hole unapologetic CP thing. I’m not even sure 40 is enough.
Removed by mod
When people claim that leaks “get people killed,” they’re referring to when undercover agents are identified while they’re in the field. The only secrets exposed in these leaks are the computer hacking techniques used by the US to spy remotely through compromised devices.
The so-called Vault 7 leak revealed how the CIA hacked Apple and Android smartphones in overseas spying operations, and efforts to turn internet-connected televisions into listening devices.
You could maybe say that closing off those surveillance channels prevented the CIA from learning about some attack, but that’s really tenuous. It also assumes that the CIA isn’t constantly developing new zero-day exploits so that they can continue to spy on just about everyone on the planet.
Did Edward Snowden kill people too?
The class of information that Snowden had was substantially more dangerous. He didn’t just walk out of there with Prism secrets.
There’s a reasonable chance that some of the data Snowden had would have had more dire impacts on remote agents.
we will know more when he goes to trial
Why should he go to trial? It’s not going to be a fair trial, and the people have a right to know that the US government is illegally surveilling them. If he truly did directly kill people as a result of his leak, there would already be preliminary evidence.
Right up with you until preliminary evidence.
If they publicly released that his leak got someone in particular killed, they would be admitting publicly that the person killed was an agent. In most cases they would not want to tip their hand on that for fear of exposing other agents.
Everyone acting like the CIA couldn’t have had leverage over that guy and made him admit to the cp charge . Unless i have some kind of proof i ain’t believing shit . And also if that is true indeed i think 40 years is fair enough for that charge alone . Or am i missing something ?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The bulk of the sentence imposed on Joshua Schulte, 35, in Manhattan federal court came for an embarrassing public release of a trove of CIA secrets by WikiLeaks in 2017.
The so-called Vault 7 leak revealed how the CIA hacked Apple and Android smartphones in overseas spying operations, and efforts to turn internet-connected televisions into listening devices.
In requesting a life sentence, Assistant U.S. Attorney David William Denton Jr. said Schulte was responsible for “the most damaging disclosures of classified information in American history.”
The judge said Schulte was “not driven by any sense of altruism,” but instead was “motivated by anger, spite and perceived grievance” against others at the agency who he believed had ignored his complaints about the work environment.
A mistrial was declared at Schulte’s original 2020 trial after jurors deadlocked on the most serious counts, including illegal gathering and transmission of national defense information.
In a statement afterward, U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said Schulte “betrayed his country by committing some of the most brazen, heinous crimes of espionage in American history.”
The original article contains 694 words, the summary contains 175 words. Saved 75%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
So, was he really just angry? Or is that a convenient lie?
We haven’t heard his side. So definitely a lie
