Showing posts with label 419 scams. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 419 scams. Show all posts

Monday, June 10, 2013

Trying to Get the Word out on the DC Madam case: Am I Being Hacked?


Ed.--This has been going on for more than a few months: I attempt to send an email to a journalist at one of their articles, say at The Telegraph, Disnfo.com, Huffington Post, Mother Jones, Talking Points Memo (this one took, no response--did it ever make it?), and numerous other progressive web sites and news publications. Either I cannot successfully send the filled-out form/message, or I get no replies, having no idea if they ever got the national security information about the DC Madam case I was apprising them of. I'm sure a few of them got it and reflected on their mortgages, sure. I've even had a semi-retired journalist who covered the intelligence beat who told me they contacted some of their other colleagues who are still working with no responses, no apparent interest. This, of course, is going on their word, a person I've never even spoken to on the phone, so there it is, I have only their word, and in these times, that ain't enough.

Do I know that I'm being hacked, can I prove it? No, but I was during the case and was surveilled, unquestionably, and it followed me onto Facebook and maybe now onto to Twitter, although it seems far more blunted. Now that we know Facebook was giving the NSA direct access, some of the harassment I was subjected to on there could be viewed in a new light. But like the victims of COINTELPRO and all the other government/private harassment programs targeting dissent in the US, I cannot prove it without herculean effort. We're talking numerous filings of FOIAs (Freedom of Information Act requests for documents on myself, whether I was being watched), but anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of this knows the Government isn't going to cough it up without one hell of a fight.

What I'm asking my readers is this: I need your help in sending out this form email that I'll paste-in below. I just attempted to send it to the journalist James Fallows at The Atlantic without any luck. It could be nothing, it could be a glitch on their part, there could be a cookie in my browser doing it, but I cannot get to the bottom of it, there seems to be no other solution then to have others send these emails on my behalf. There's nothing in this email message that I haven't written or published here on this blog, it's generalized. If you know a serious journalist covering national security issues, or you simply read on the subject a lot and have a reasonably secure email account, I need you to submit this letter to news sites, blogs, journalists, progressive web sites, and so on, I need your help and would appreciate it greatly. Thank you.

And without being too prolix, here's the text of the letter. Anyone who sends it off in my name, unredacted and unaltered has my full permission:  

Good day, I was a member of the DC Madam's defense team back in late 2007, early 2008. We were granted wide-ranging subpoena powers over the telecoms as well as the intelligence community by Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler, who, I might add, was shortly after that replaced without any explanation by a board of judges (a board she was on!) by former FISA Court judge James Robertson. He quashed all of that once on board for reasons that I think were obvious: the case involved surveillance, most likely of her escort service which had a large percentage of defense/intelligence contractors, military and intelligence officers, and a whole lot more. No one seems to want to touch this element of what was erroneously defined by the MSM as a simple sex scandal--it was not, it was far more. I don't expect you to answer because I'm always meeting a wall of silence on this.

I was hired as a general researcher by the late Ms. Palfrey in December 2007 and paid by the federal defender's office for my work, but I did far more pro bono after that month. Indeed, we were going through the subpoenaed phone records that had been provided by one of her carriers, Verizon, but AT&T and Sprint had yet to comply when Judge Kessler was abruptly replaced in the middle of the night in late November. But, we had the records that went much deeper into who had a phone number and a cell or landline--the whens and wheres--and came up with a stunning array that represented the national security state and their contractors and employees on both fronts. One of them was Ret. Col. Ron Roughead, brother to now-retired CNO Gary Roughead. The former worked for SAIC the last I knew and that firm came up in materials and outside of them so many times as not to be coincidental. I could go on and on with the very solid connections between players, but I will leave you with one example: there was one call, and one call only, from a former Verizon engineer with a Muslim name who was also an early war on terror arrest, in the DC area. I won't name him here, but his story was in the press and articles can be found online.

I should also add that we found some indications of intelligence activities in a hack of her email account going back to fall of 1998--yes, it could have been anyone, but they were being forwarded all of the ingoing and outgoing items in it, beyond the sophistication of the average internet user that year. It was a Yahoo.uk account. We got bounce-backs that I identified when the surveillance account was closed. Oddly, the bounce-backs contained the text of a 419 scam, a Nigerian one that's well-known, a fake barrister's note. This wasn't directed at us and was a clear glitch. It has been written that--and I cannot speak to the veracity of it--419 scams have been known to be used as covers for intelligence operations. And there is more, much more. I wrote an account on the case that's heavily-detailed and contains literally hundreds of emails between the late Ms. Palfrey, myself, and others, primary documents, court filings, etc., down to her autopsy report. The story's not cold, incidentally, since no one ever got to the real dynamics of it, other than myself and a few others. The press was ill-equipped to do so, or unwilling, but I cannot say decisively.

This NSA story, I believe, has a direct relation to what happened to Ms. Palfrey and her escort service. I've experienced strange online harassment, visits from contractors to my blog (http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com), hacking of accounts--you name it, outside of physical confrontation and/or shadowing. I implore you to at least consider this story in light of recent events, to look deeper, or to pass some of this along, and this is just the tip of the iceberg here.


Regards, Matt Janovic, writer and private researcher



Thursday, June 02, 2011

An interesting analog in the age of digital hacking


Ed.--A recent spate of cyberattacks on Google's Gmail system (originating in China) reminded me of a some similar techniques employed against Deborah Jeane Palfrey (the DC Madam), perhaps by the United States Government or non-governmental actors--contractors of one variety or another. The Chinese attacks ensnared several hundred individuals, some of them high level American government officials, presumably some working for the State Department.

Some whose Gmail accounts were breached were American military personnel as well as a few Chinese dissidents, perhaps included as a diversion or as overlap from other hacking operations originating from the same actors. Whoever they were, they were looking for specific types of people doing specific types of work for the U.S. Government; specific individuals were targeted for hacking.

Do no evil?

Google routinely cooperates with the America national security state, so it's no surprise that they've been targeted by other nations using third party actors to provide a kind of plausible deniability. In the case of the recent attack on Google, it's safe to assume that the encouragement of non-governmental actors was formulated to prevent accountability being directed at the regime in Beijing, a fair assumption. Does the U.S. do this? Certainly--one could argue that we pioneered its use--and some of this echoes the very real world attacks on American soil on September 11, 2001, ushering in a newer form of mercenary where attacks by one state against another are done indirectly by proxy, "non-governmental" agents.

21st Century Brigands?

This is perhaps going to be the Golden Age of the mercenary, with further tech-enhancements.

Mercenary hackers aren't new, but the scale of their activities is growing rapidly. Information warfare itself is an old tactic of political entities, and nation states like the United States or even Turkey are engaged in it all of the time.


...Google said Wednesday that personal Gmail accounts of several hundred people, including senior U.S. government officials, military personnel and political activists, had been exposed. Google traced the origin of the attacks to Jinan, China, the home city of a military vocational school whose computers were linked to a more sophisticated assault 17 months ago on Google's systems." ... ("US says no... ," AP, June 2, 2011)

Most modern nation states are engaging in it at some stage, but like the use of drones in recent conflicts, it remains unofficial policy, often mislabeled as "conspiracy." Cyberwarfare isn't new, but the widening scope of its use by state and "rogue" (using the term without any value judgment) actors is.

The Palfrey defense was under surveillance, period, it's inarguable and I bore witness to it directly. Some will say that it was for legitimate purposes of the enforcement of the law, but how then would any defendant get a fair trial under such scrutiny? What's arguable is who it might have been which one could speculate on endlessly with such a muddied trail. That's how it goes with hacking and cyberattacks, but with enough persistence and even some luck the origins of a hit can sometimes be uncovered. The key is to erase as much of a trail leading to the originator of the attack as possible and it's not rocket science, but not so prevalent or as easy in the
stone age days of the Internent back in the fall of 1998 when the madam's account was hacked.

Even at the time what they did wasn't especially sophisticated, but the average Internet user wouldn't have known how to do the breach and what followed from it.

Just shy of ten years later I had a productive exchange with a former attorney of the DC Madam's about the breaching of the her email account:

Jeane and I searched and searched and finally traced the insertion of a email forwarding address in her earthlink account to a Yahoo.uk email address. When I took it up with yahoo.uk, they had no answer how anyone had hacked into Jeane's account and could not identify the owner of the yahoo.uk email account as it was to a string of fictious email accounts. (Correspondence with the Editor, August 2008)

This was to be expected whether it was a state actor or not. It's a very good possibility that this was a former client of Pamela Martin & Associates, but that could just as well mean the arrow points to the state as well as contractors.

What raised a few flags this week for me came from this passage in an AP article on the recent breaches in Google's Gmail infrastructure that compromised some of the personal email accounts of a few high level American officials.

The modus operandi is similar if not identical to the breaches in the DC Madam's Sprynet email account back in 1998:

...While Google said last year's attack was aimed at its corporate infrastructure, the latest incident appears to have relied on tricking email users into revealing passwords, based on Google's description in its blog post.

It said the perpetrators changed the victims' email forwarding settings, presumably secretly sending the victims' personal emails to other recipients. ... ("Google reveals... ," Reuters, June 2, 2011 )

The final sentence is exactly what happened to the DC Madam's email account sometime in October 1998.

It's almost become a cliche that intelligence agencies (and similar institutions and groups) can and have used primitive forms of hacking as a cover for the activities against various actionable targets. Perhaps one day we'll find through declassifications that a government contractor created all of those phony email accounts when Palfrey began to become a "person of interest" to whoever hacked her account and changed her forwarding settings, intercepting all of her emails going in and out (I know from experience as I was receiving bouncebacks once the phony account had been closed). Most likely, she was beginning to become a liability to a privileged former client...but the truth of the case is elusive as ever.


"US says no official email hacked; FBI on case," AP, June 2, 2011): http://enews.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20110602/39b5ae26-4471-4ea8-b6c5-afbde96ef979

"Google reveals Gmail hacking, says likely from China," Reuters, June 2, 2011: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_google


Friday, September 14, 2007

Kenton Clark, Fictional 'Attorney'


WWW
-At this writing, Ms. Palfrey, myself, and her civil attorney are still receiving return error e-mails every single time we correspond and send to each other. In the beginning (there was God), virtually everyone I would send to would return this way, but it narrowed to just Ms. Palfrey and Montogmery Blair Sibley.

This is extremely telling, because with the narrowing, one gets the possible indication that parameters were being set--initially, all of my e-mail, then just between the aforementioned. It wouldn't surprise me if it was some 'vigilante' action by some goober with people-clothing and some tech know-how (and a stunted, reactionary personality).


There are--of course--other possibilities, such as that what we're experiencing is a very desperate prosecution team abusing antiterror laws at the Justice Department. Remember that last week, federal district Judge Victor Marrero ruled against NSLs to internet and telecommunications providers with broad discretion, including gag orders to the recipients of the NSLs (like say, Google or Verizon, and even AT&T or Yahoo). At present, there are a little over 80-days left for the government to appeal Judge Marrero's decision. In the mean time, they can still keep ISPs under the gag, and continue their fun-and-games, even with boss Alberto leaving today.

Again, it could just be some aspiring Tim McVeigh(s) out there, reactionary vigilante-types who think that some dumb games with someone's e-mail is going to intimidate. What's interesting is the intended-effect on the new round of hacker foreplay: not obstructing our First amendment guarantee of free and open communication with each other, but to temporarily create the impression that we're receiving send errors and that the messages aren't reaching Ms. Palfrey, Mr. Sibley, or myself.

This would suggest that fear of being caught violating our ability to correspond--since it's illegal and protected speech--is in the puny fore brain(s) of whomever is expediting the action(s). It's not paranoia, it's happening, see the post below for a sample of the error mails, they're all the same.


Who is it? We don't know yet, but we're looking into it. Luckily, the individuals doing this aren't very bright, they've made a few mistakes that give away parts of their identities: we know for a fact that whomever is doing it is American. Why? In every e-mail return message, the same phony lawyer's name occurs--Kenton Clark, which is found most often in '419' spams, usually from Nigeria. So? Ms. Palfrey found the significance this time: the error messages all contain this address, 'attorneykentonclark_office@yahoo.co.uk' (it's dead). In the UK, a lawyer is commonly referred to as a 'barrister,' not an attorney.

And today, Ms. Palfrey and I received some e-mails from an anonymous individual via http://www.hush.com/. [Ed., 08.28.2008--This turned-out to be a friendly contact!] Curiouser and curiouser. Sam Eardth: kiss my ass.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK: HACKING OF E-MAIL COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN 'DC MADAM' AND J-7 (AND OTHERS) OCCURRING


WWW
-While I'm not remotely intimidated (and unimpressed), I find this very galling and possibly due to desperation. This is happening at a time in the pretrial proceedings of Ms. Jeane Palfrey, a period that's crucial for due process to occur--she's claiming discovery through 'the Classified Information Procedures Act,' and that there is possibly a national security aspect to her trial and what began her legal predicament. I'd say that that's a forgone conclusion. Here's the text of the delivery error mails, they're all the same:

This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim).

A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

attorneykentonclark_office@yahoo.co.uk
SMTP error from remote mailer after end of data:
host mx1.mail.ukl.yahoo.com [195.50.106.7]: 554 delivery error:
dd Sorry your message to attorneykentonclark_office@yahoo.co.uk cannot be delivered. This account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. - mta144.mail.ukl.yahoo.com

------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------

Return-path:
Received: from carlin.mail.atl.earthlink.net ([207.69.200.104])
by smarth-dorada.atl.sa.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #4)
id 1IURVD-0002nA-00
for attorneykentonclark_office@yahoo.co.uk; Sun, 09 Sep 2007 14:27:23 -0400
X-ELNK-Loop: jeanepalfrey@sprynet.com
Received: from noehlo.host ([127.0.0.1])
by carlin.mail.atl.earthlink.net (EarthLink SMTP Server) with SMTP id 1iurvb5Rp3Nl3q80; Sun, 9 Sep 2007 14:27:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.66])
by carlin.mail.atl.earthlink.net (EarthLink SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1iurvb3Rp3Nl3q80
for ; Sun, 9 Sep 2007 14:27:21 -0400 (EDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net;
b=aWRoG1yPzuwnK9BwVz/7AdNLAvuuzExW1pZr5dDcyWDdo+FcyWgqFB8w96xejArG;
h=Received:Message-ID:X-Priority:Reply-To:X-Mailer:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [4.252.73.198] (helo=earthlink.net)
by elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34)
id 1IURV6-0005o4-Gt; Sun, 09 Sep 2007 14:27:21 -0400
Message-ID: <>
X-Priority:%203
Reply-To:%20
To: mbsibley@earthlink.net
Cc:"
Subject: RE: Ronald Roughead reading our mails?
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 13:27:06 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=" ----='_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8"X-ELNK-Trace: 41b8bb0752b208c31aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec79a76eb1be85f305ce42b3
b3bc4068f6f1350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c [Ed.Broken to fit layout.]
X-Originating-IP: 4.252.73.198
X-ELNK-Received-Info: spv=0;
X-ELNK-AV: 0
X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=010;

------=_NextPart_84815C5ABAF209EF376268C8
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII


J-7 isn't the only one affected by this. A number of individuals--even outside of the United States--have been attempting to e-mail Ms. Palfrey and have been receiving the same messages back. Interestingly, the original messages sometimes reach her...and sometimes they don't. Was/is there ever a 'Kenton Clark' who was/is an attorney in the United Kingdom? Doubtful, though not impossible. Ms. Palfrey informs me (at 9:50 PM Eastern) that she has never known or corresponded with anyone by this name.

A quick google search turns-up something very interesting: there is a classic spam of Nigerian-origin that has the name of a man calling himself 'J. Kenton Clark,' which is very sloppy on-the-part of the individuals (probably at SAIC, they handle much of the contracting for internet surveillance for 'terrorists,' and Ron Roughead is part of these activities) doing it. The name likely comes from a '419 scam':
The so-called "419" scam is a type of fraud dominated by criminals from Nigeria and other countries in Africa. Victims of the scam are promised a large amount of money, such as a lottery prize, inheritance, money sitting in some bank account, etc. Victims never receive this non-existent fortune but are tricked into sending their money to the criminals, who remain anonymous. They hide their real identity and location by using fake names and fake postal addresses as well as communicating via anonymous free email accounts and mobile phones.(http://www.joewein.net/419/emails/2006-05/30/541846.1.htm)
It sounds a lot like the phony 'CEASE AND DESIST' e-mails I received shortly after writing about Ret. Col. Roughead, now working for SAIC as far as anyone knows. As far as this writer can tell, there was never a 'Sam Eardth' (the phony cease and desist e-mails), or even a UK-based barrister named 'Kenton Clark,' or 'J. Kenton Clark.'

This is all unsurprising considering that there are verifiable connections now with SAIC and Ms. Palfrey's phone records for Pamela Martin & Associates. One could imagine the prosecution is in-contact with a number of agencies--illegally--abusing antiterrorist laws in a case that should have been dismissed a year ago. From an example of a classic '419':

Fraud email example:
From: "J. Kenton Clark" jakclark-5@hotmail.com
Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 13:18:47 +0000
Subject: VERY URGENT:DEAR AZAR !!!!!!!!!!!!!

FROM:BARRISTER J.K. CLARK ESQ.
ROYAL CHAMBERS
20-23 AWOLOWO ROADIKOYI LAGOS NIGERIA.TEL: 234-809-556-4321
EMAIL: clarklawchambers@fastermail.com

Dear Azar,

I am Barrister J.K.Clark Esq.,an attorney of law. I am the personal attorney to late Mr.Roy J. Azar, a national of your country, possibly could be your brother or close relation, who used to work with Anglo-Dutch oil giant, Shell Petroleum and Development Company (SPDC) in Nigeria, here-in-after shall be referred to as my client. ... (ibid)

And so, Ian Fleming's advice on the third-time is not as fictional as we might want to believe. Surely, any blocks of communication by a government agency or contractor (like SAIC or MITRE) are bars to the First Amendment right of free speech and communication between American citizens. This is what makes it unconstitutional and criminal.

Keep-in-mind that Congress created the ability for various agencies like the FBI, and other intelligence agencies and contractors, to do this. One should look to the recent federal district court decision by Judge Victor Marrero, although the government currently has 90 days to appeal the decision on NSLs (National Security Letters).


If it is the government and her agents, they are all on very shaky legal ground right now. Time to cease and desist, kids, the fun is over. No oversight, too much discretion--sounds like the FBI! Meanwhile, the press keeps covering how sorry Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana is for sinning--well, actually, he might have committed a criminal act while in-office.

Ed.-Ms. Palfrey's civil attorney--Montgomery Blair Sibley--has also been encountering similar 'bounce-backs,' containing phony e-mail addresses that are contained in classic 'scam spam' e- mails. In this case, the origin is from 'mailto:Mailer-Daemon@smarth-dorada.atl.sa.earthlink.net'. The section after '@' is where many classic spams originate from.