[News] CIA's Vault 7: Hacking Tools Revealed

Anti-Imperialist News news at freedomarchives.org
Tue Mar 7 15:12:58 EST 2017


https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/# <https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/>


  Vault 7: CIA Hacking Tools Revealed

Today, Tuesday 7 March 2017, WikiLeaks begins its new series of leaks on 
the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. Code-named "Vault 7" by WikiLeaks, 
it is the largest ever publication of confidential documents on the agency.

The first full part of the series, "Year Zero", comprises 8,761 
documents and files from an isolated, high-security network situated 
inside the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/files/org-chart.png> in Langley, Virgina. 
It follows an introductory disclosure last month of CIA targeting French 
political parties and candidates in the lead up to the 2012 presidential 
election <https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012>.

Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal 
including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized "zero day" exploits, 
malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This 
extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred 
million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity 
of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated among former 
U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one 
of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.

"Year Zero" introduces the scope and direction of the CIA's global 
covert hacking program, its malware arsenal and dozens of "zero day" 
weaponized exploits against a wide range of U.S. and European company 
products, include Apple's iPhone, Google's Android and Microsoft's 
Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones.

Since 2001 the CIA has gained political and budgetary preeminence over 
the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). The CIA found itself building 
not just its now infamous drone fleet, but a very different type of 
covert, globe-spanning force — its own substantial fleet of hackers. The 
agency's hacking division freed it from having to disclose its often 
controversial operations to the NSA (its primary bureaucratic rival) in 
order to draw on the NSA's hacking capacities.

By the end of 2016, the CIA's hacking division, which formally falls 
under the agency's Center for Cyber Intelligence 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/files/org-chart.png> (CCI), had over 5000 
registered users and had produced more than a thousand hacking systems, 
trojans, viruses, and other "weaponized" malware. Such is the scale of 
the CIA's undertaking that by 2016, its hackers had utilized more code 
than that used to run Facebook. The CIA had created, in effect, its "own 
NSA" with even less accountability and without publicly answering the 
question as to whether such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the 
capacities of a rival agency could be justified.

In a statement to WikiLeaks the source details policy questions that 
they say urgently need to be debated in public, including whether the 
CIA's hacking capabilities exceed its mandated powers and the problem of 
public oversight of the agency. The source wishes to initiate a public 
debate about the security, creation, use, proliferation and democratic 
control of cyberweapons.

Once a single cyber 'weapon' is 'loose' it can spread around the world 
in seconds, to be used by rival states, cyber mafia and teenage hackers 
alike.

Julian Assange, WikiLeaks editor stated that "There is an extreme 
proliferation risk in the development of cyber 'weapons'. Comparisons 
can be drawn between the uncontrolled proliferation of such 'weapons', 
which results from the inability to contain them combined with their 
high market value, and the global arms trade. But the significance of 
"Year Zero" goes well beyond the choice between cyberwar and cyberpeace. 
The disclosure is also exceptional from a political, legal and forensic 
perspective."

Wikileaks has carefully reviewed the "Year Zero" disclosure and 
published substantive CIA documentation while avoiding the distribution 
of 'armed' cyberweapons until a consensus emerges on the technical and 
political nature of the CIA's program and how such 'weapons' should 
analyzed, disarmed and published.

Wikileaks has also decided to redact 
<about:reader?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwikileaks.org%2Fciav7p1%2F#REDACT> and 
anonymise some identifying information in "Year Zero" for in depth 
analysis. These redactions include ten of thousands of CIA targets and 
attack machines throughout Latin America, Europe and the United States. 
While we are aware of the imperfect results of any approach chosen, we 
remain committed to our publishing model and note that the quantity of 
published pages in "Vault 7" part one (“Year Zero”) already eclipses the 
total number of pages published over the first three years of the Edward 
Snowden NSA leaks.


      CIA malware targets iPhone, Android, smart TVs

CIA malware and hacking tools are built by EDG (Engineering Development 
Group), a software development group within CCI (Center for Cyber 
Intelligence), a department belonging to the CIA's DDI (Directorate for 
Digital Innovation). The DDI is one of the five major directorates of 
the CIA (see this organizational chart 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/files/org-chart.png> of the CIA for more 
details).

The EDG is responsible for the development, testing and operational 
support of all backdoors, exploits, malicious payloads, trojans, viruses 
and any other kind of malware used by the CIA in its covert operations 
world-wide.

The increasing sophistication of surveillance techniques has drawn 
comparisons with George Orwell's 1984, but "Weeping Angel", developed by 
the CIA's Embedded Devices Branch (EDB) 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_753667.html>, which infests 
smart TVs, transforming them into covert microphones, is surely its most 
emblematic realization.

The attack against Samsung smart TVs 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_12353643.html> was developed in 
cooperation with the United Kingdom's MI5/BTSS. After infestation, 
Weeping Angel places the target TV in a 'Fake-Off' mode, so that the 
owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on. In 'Fake-Off' mode 
the TV operates as a bug, recording conversations in the room and 
sending them over the Internet to a covert CIA server.

As of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle 
control systems used by modern cars and trucks 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_13763790.html>. The purpose of 
such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in 
nearly undetectable assassinations.

The CIA's Mobile Devices Branch (MDB) developed numerous attacks to 
remotely hack and control popular smart phones 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_3276804.html>. Infected phones 
can be instructed to send the CIA the user's geolocation, audio and text 
communications as well as covertly activate the phone's camera and 
microphone.

Despite iPhone's minority share (14.5%) of the global smart phone market 
in 2016, a specialized unit in the CIA's Mobile Development Branch 
produces malware to infest, control and exfiltrate data from iPhones and 
other Apple products running iOS, such as iPads 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_2359301.html>. CIA's arsenal 
includes numerous local and remote "zero days" 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_13205587.html> developed by CIA 
or obtained from GCHQ, NSA, FBI or purchased from cyber arms contractors 
such as Baitshop. The disproportionate focus on iOS may be explained by 
the popularity of the iPhone among social, political, diplomatic and 
business elites.

A similar unit targets Google's Android which is used to run the 
majority of the world's smart phones (~85%) including Samsung, HTC and 
Sony <https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_11763721.html>. 1.15 
billion Android powered phones were sold last year. "Year Zero" shows 
that as of 2016 the CIA had 24 "weaponized" Android "zero days" 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_11629096.html> which it has 
developed itself and obtained from GCHQ, NSA and cyber arms contractors.

These techniques permit the CIA to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp, 
Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking the "smart" 
phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic before 
encryption is applied.


      CIA malware targets Windows, OSx, Linux, routers

The CIA also runs a very substantial effort to infect and control 
Microsoft Windows users 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_11628612.html> with its malware. 
This includes multiple local and remote weaponized "zero days", air gap 
jumping viruses such as "Hammer Drill" 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_17072172.html> which infects 
software distributed on CD/DVDs, infectors for removable media such as 
USBs <https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_13762636.html>, systems to 
hide data in images 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_13763247.html> or in covert disk 
areas ("Brutal Kangaroo" 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_13763236.html>) and to keep its 
malware infestations going 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_13763650.html>.

Many of these infection efforts are pulled together by the CIA's 
Automated Implant Branch (AIB) 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_3276805.html>, which has 
developed several attack systems for automated infestation and control 
of CIA malware, such as "Assassin" and "Medusa".

Attacks against Internet infrastructure and webservers are developed by 
the CIA's Network Devices Branch (NDB) 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_15204355.html>.

The CIA has developed automated multi-platform malware attack and 
control systems covering Windows, Mac OS X, Solaris, Linux and more, 
such as EDB's "HIVE" and the related "Cutthroat" and "Swindle" tools, 
which are described in the examples section below 
<about:reader?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwikileaks.org%2Fciav7p1%2F#HIVE>.


      CIA 'hoarded' vulnerabilities ("zero days")

In the wake of Edward Snowden's leaks about the NSA, the U.S. technology 
industry secured a commitment from the Obama administration that the 
executive would disclose on an ongoing basis — rather than hoard — 
serious vulnerabilities, exploits, bugs or "zero days" to Apple, Google, 
Microsoft, and other US-based manufacturers.

Serious vulnerabilities not disclosed to the manufacturers places huge 
swathes of the population and critical infrastructure at risk to foreign 
intelligence or cyber criminals who independently discover or hear 
rumors of the vulnerability. If the CIA can discover such 
vulnerabilities so can others.

The U.S. government's commitment to the Vulnerabilities Equities Process 
<https://is.gd/vepvep> came after significant lobbying by US technology 
companies, who risk losing their share of the global market over real 
and perceived hidden vulnerabilities. The government stated that it 
would disclose all pervasive vulnerabilities discovered after 2010 on an 
ongoing basis.

"Year Zero" documents show that the CIA breached the Obama 
administration's commitments. Many of the vulnerabilities used in the 
CIA's cyber arsenal are pervasive and some may already have been found 
by rival intelligence agencies or cyber criminals.

As an example, specific CIA malware revealed in "Year Zero" is able to 
penetrate, infest and control both the Android phone and iPhone software 
that runs or has run presidential Twitter accounts. The CIA attacks this 
software by using undisclosed security vulnerabilities ("zero days") 
possessed by the CIA but if the CIA can hack these phones then so can 
everyone else who has obtained or discovered the vulnerability. As long 
as the CIA keeps these vulnerabilities concealed from Apple and Google 
(who make the phones) they will not be fixed, and the phones will remain 
hackable.

The same vulnerabilities exist for the population at large, including 
the U.S. Cabinet, Congress, top CEOs, system administrators, security 
officers and engineers. By hiding these security flaws from 
manufacturers like Apple and Google the CIA ensures that it can hack 
everyone &mdsh; at the expense of leaving everyone hackable.


      'Cyberwar' programs are a serious proliferation risk

Cyber 'weapons' are not possible to keep under effective control.

While nuclear proliferation has been restrained by the enormous costs 
and visible infrastructure involved in assembling enough fissile 
material to produce a critical nuclear mass, cyber 'weapons', once 
developed, are very hard to retain.

Cyber 'weapons' are in fact just computer programs which can be pirated 
like any other. Since they are entirely comprised of information they 
can be copied quickly with no marginal cost.

Securing such 'weapons' is particularly difficult since the same people 
who develop and use them have the skills to exfiltrate copies without 
leaving traces — sometimes by using the very same 'weapons' against the 
organizations that contain them. There are substantial price incentives 
for government hackers and consultants to obtain copies since there is a 
global "vulnerability market" that will pay hundreds of thousands to 
millions of dollars for copies of such 'weapons'. Similarly, contractors 
and companies who obtain such 'weapons' sometimes use them for their own 
purposes, obtaining advantage over their competitors in selling 
'hacking' services.

Over the last three years the United States intelligence sector, which 
consists of government agencies such as the CIA and NSA and their 
contractors, such as Booz Allan Hamilton, has been subject to 
unprecedented series of data exfiltrations by its own workers.

A number of intelligence community members not yet publicly named have 
been arrested or subject to federal criminal investigations in separate 
incidents.

Most visibly, on February 8, 2017 a U.S. federal grand jury indicted 
Harold T. Martin III with 20 counts of mishandling classified 
information. The Department of Justice alleged that it seized some 
50,000 gigabytes of information from Harold T. Martin III that he had 
obtained from classified programs at NSA and CIA, including the source 
code for numerous hacking tools.

Once a single cyber 'weapon' is 'loose' it can spread around the world 
in seconds, to be used by peer states, cyber mafia and teenage hackers 
alike.


      U.S. Consulate in Frankfurt is a covert CIA hacker base

In addition to its operations in Langley, Virginia the CIA also uses the 
U.S. consulate in Frankfurt as a covert base for its hackers covering 
Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

CIA hackers operating out of the Frankfurt consulate ("Center for Cyber 
Intelligence Europe" 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_20251151.html> or CCIE) are 
given diplomatic ("black") passports and State Department cover. The 
instructions for incoming CIA hackers 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_26607630.html> make Germany's 
counter-intelligence efforts appear inconsequential: "Breeze through 
German Customs because you have your cover-for-action story down pat, 
and all they did was stamp your passport"

/Your Cover Story (for this trip)/
*Q:* Why are you here?
*A:* Supporting technical consultations at the Consulate.

Two earlier WikiLeaks publications give further detail on CIA approaches 
to customs <https://wikileaks.org/cia-travel/> and secondary screening 
procedures <https://wikileaks.org/cia-travel/>.

Once in Frankfurt CIA hackers can travel without further border checks 
to the 25 European countries that are part of the Shengen open border 
area — including France, Italy and Switzerland.

A number of the CIA's electronic attack methods are designed for 
physical proximity. These attack methods are able to penetrate high 
security networks that are disconnected from the internet, such as 
police record database. In these cases, a CIA officer, agent or allied 
intelligence officer acting under instructions, physically infiltrates 
the targeted workplace. The attacker is provided with a USB containing 
malware developed for the CIA for this purpose, which is inserted into 
the targeted computer. The attacker then infects and exfiltrates data to 
removable media. For example, the CIA attack system Fine Dining 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_20251107.html>, provides 24 
decoy applications for CIA spies to use. To witnesses, the spy appears 
to be running a program showing videos (e.g VLC), presenting slides 
(Prezi), playing a computer game (Breakout2, 2048) or even running a 
fake virus scanner (Kaspersky, McAfee, Sophos). But while the decoy 
application is on the screen, the underlaying system is automatically 
infected and ransacked.


      How the CIA dramatically increased proliferation risks

In what is surely one of the most astounding intelligence own goals in 
living memory, the CIA structured its classification regime such that 
for the most market valuable part of "Vault 7" — the CIA's weaponized 
malware (implants + zero days), Listening Posts (LP), and Command and 
Control (C2) systems — the agency has little legal recourse.

The CIA made these systems unclassified.

Why the CIA chose to make its cyberarsenal unclassified reveals how 
concepts developed for military use do not easily crossover to the 
'battlefield' of cyber 'war'.

To attack its targets, the CIA usually requires that its implants 
communicate with their control programs over the internet. If CIA 
implants, Command & Control and Listening Post software were classified, 
then CIA officers could be prosecuted or dismissed for violating rules 
that prohibit placing classified information onto the Internet. 
Consequently the CIA has secretly made most of its cyber spying/war code 
unclassified. The U.S. government is not able to assert copyright 
either, due to restrictions in the U.S. Constitution. This means that 
cyber 'arms' manufactures and computer hackers can freely "pirate" these 
'weapons' if they are obtained. The CIA has primarily had to rely on 
obfuscation to protect its malware secrets.

Conventional weapons such as missiles may be fired at the enemy (i.e 
into an unsecured area). Proximity to or impact with the target 
detonates the ordnance including its classified parts. Hence military 
personnel do not violate classification rules by firing ordnance with 
classified parts. Ordnance will likely explode. If it does not, that is 
not the operator's intent.

Over the last decade U.S. hacking operations have been increasingly 
dressed up in military jargon to tap into Department of Defense funding 
streams. For instance, attempted "malware injections" (commercial 
jargon) or "implant drops" (NSA jargon) are being called "fires" as if a 
weapon was being fired. However the analogy is questionable.

Unlike bullets, bombs or missiles, most CIA malware is designed to live 
for days or even years after it has reached its 'target'. CIA malware 
does not "explode on impact" but rather permanently infests its target. 
In order to infect target's device, copies of the malware must be placed 
on the target's devices, giving physical possession of the malware to 
the target. To exfiltrate data back to the CIA or to await further 
instructions the malware must communicate with CIA Command & Control 
(C2) systems placed on internet connected servers. But such servers are 
typically not approved to hold classified information, so CIA command 
and control systems are also made unclassified.

A successful 'attack' on a target's computer system is more like a 
series of complex stock maneuvers in a hostile take-over bid or the 
careful planting of rumors in order to gain control over an 
organization's leadership rather than the firing of a weapons system. If 
there is a military analogy to be made, the infestation of a target is 
perhaps akin to the execution of a whole series of military maneuvers 
against the target's territory including observation, infiltration, 
occupation and exploitation.


      Evading forensics and anti-virus

A series of standards lay out CIA malware infestation patterns which are 
likely to assist forensic crime scene investigators as well as Apple, 
Microsoft, Google, Samsung, Nokia, Blackberry, Siemens and anti-virus 
companies attribute and defend against attacks.

"Tradecraft DO's and DON'Ts" 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_14587109.html>

contains CIA rules on how its malware should be written to avoid 
fingerprints implicating the "CIA, US government, or its witting partner 
companies" in "forensic review". Similar secret standards cover the

use of encryption to hide CIA hacker and malware communication 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/files/NOD%20Cryptographic%20Requirements%20v1.1%20TOP%20SECRET.pdf> 


(pdf),

describing targets & exfiltrated data 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/files/Codex-Spec-v1-SECRET.pdf>

(pdf) as well as

executing payloads 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/files/ICE-Spec-v3-final-SECRET.pdf>

(pdf) and

persisting 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/files/Persisted-DLL-Spec-v2-SECRET.pdf>

(pdf) in the target's machines over time.

CIA hackers developed successful attacks against most well known 
anti-virus programs. These are documented in AV defeats 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_2064514.html>, Personal Security 
Products <https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_13762910.html>, 
Detecting and defeating PSPs 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_7995642.html> and 
PSP/Debugger/RE Avoidance 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_2621845.html>. For example, 
Comodo was defeated by CIA malware placing itself in the Window's 
"Recycle Bin" <https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_5341269.html>. 
While Comodo 6.x has a "Gaping Hole of DOOM" 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_5341272.html>.

CIA hackers discussed what the NSA's "Equation Group" hackers did wrong 
and how the CIA's malware makers could avoid similar exposure 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_14588809.html>.

The CIA's Engineering Development Group (EDG) management system contains 
around 500 different projects (only some of which are documented by 
"Year Zero") each with their own sub-projects, malware and hacker tools.

The majority of these projects relate to tools that are used for 
penetration, infestation ("implanting"), control, and exfiltration.

Another branch of development focuses on the development and operation 
of Listening Posts (LP) and Command and Control (C2) systems used to 
communicate with and control CIA implants; special projects are used to 
target specific hardware from routers to smart TVs.

Some example projects are described below, but see the table of contents 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/index.html> for the full list of 
projects described by WikiLeaks' "Year Zero".


      UMBRAGE

The CIA's hand crafted hacking techniques pose a problem for the agency. 
Each technique it has created forms a "fingerprint" that can be used by 
forensic investigators to attribute multiple different attacks to the 
same entity.

This is analogous to finding the same distinctive knife wound on 
multiple separate murder victims. The unique wounding style creates 
suspicion that a single murderer is responsible. As soon one murder in 
the set is solved then the other murders also find likely attribution.

The CIA's Remote Devices Branch 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_753668.html>'s UMBRAGE group 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_2621751.html> collects and 
maintains a substantial library 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_2621753.html> of attack 
techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other states including the 
Russian Federation.

With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total 
number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind 
the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen 
from.

UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam 
capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, 
anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.


      Fine Dining

Fine Dining comes with a standardized questionnaire i.e menu that CIA 
case officers fill out. The questionnaire is used by the agency's OSB 
(Operational Support Branch 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/space_1736706.html>) to transform the 
requests of case officers into technical requirements for hacking 
attacks (typically "exfiltrating" information from computer systems) for 
specific operations. The questionnaire allows the OSB to identify how to 
adapt existing tools for the operation, and communicate this to CIA 
malware configuration staff. The OSB functions as the interface between 
CIA operational staff and the relevant technical support staff.

Among the list of possible targets of the collection are 'Asset', 
'Liason Asset', 'System Administrator', 'Foreign Information 
Operations', 'Foreign Intelligence Agencies' and 'Foreign Government 
Entities'. Notably absent is any reference to extremists or 
transnational criminals. The 'Case Officer' is also asked to specify the 
environment of the target like the type of computer, operating system 
used, Internet connectivity and installed anti-virus utilities (PSPs) as 
well as a list of file types to be exfiltrated like Office documents, 
audio, video, images or custom file types. The 'menu' also asks for 
information if recurring access to the target is possible and how long 
unobserved access to the computer can be maintained. This information is 
used by the CIA's 'JQJIMPROVISE' software (see below) to configure a set 
of CIA malware suited to the specific needs of an operation.


      Improvise (JQJIMPROVISE)

'Improvise' is a toolset for configuration, post-processing, payload 
setup and execution vector selection for survey/exfiltration tools 
supporting all major operating systems like Windows (Bartender), MacOS 
(JukeBox) and Linux (DanceFloor). Its configuration utilities like 
Margarita allows the NOC (Network Operation Center) to customize tools 
based on requirements from 'Fine Dining' questionairies.


      HIVE

HIVE is a multi-platform CIA malware suite and its associated control 
software. The project provides customizable implants for Windows, 
Solaris, MikroTik (used in internet routers) and Linux platforms and a 
Listening Post (LP)/Command and Control (C2) infrastructure to 
communicate with these implants.

The implants are configured to communicate via HTTPS with the webserver 
of a cover domain; each operation utilizing these implants has a 
separate cover domain and the infrastructure can handle any number of 
cover domains.

Each cover domain resolves to an IP address that is located at a 
commercial VPS (Virtual Private Server) provider. The public-facing 
server forwards all incoming traffic via a VPN to a 'Blot' server that 
handles actual connection requests from clients. It is setup for 
optional SSL client authentication: if a client sends a valid client 
certificate (only implants can do that), the connection is forwarded to 
the 'Honeycomb' toolserver that communicates with the implant; if a 
valid certificate is missing (which is the case if someone tries to open 
the cover domain website by accident), the traffic is forwarded to a 
cover server that delivers an unsuspicious looking website.

The Honeycomb toolserver receives exfiltrated information from the 
implant; an operator can also task the implant to execute jobs on the 
target computer, so the toolserver acts as a C2 (command and control) 
server for the implant.

Similar functionality (though limited to Windows) is provided by the 
RickBobby project.

See the classified

user <https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/files/UsersGuide.pdf>

and

developer <https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/files/DevelopersGuide.pdf>

guides for HIVE.


      Why now?

WikiLeaks published as soon as its verification and analysis were ready.

In Febuary the Trump administration has issued an Executive Order 
calling for a "Cyberwar" review to be prepared within 30 days.

While the review increases the timeliness and relevance of the 
publication it did not play a role in setting the publication date.


      Redactions

Names, email addresses and external IP addresses have been redacted in 
the released pages (70,875 redactions in total) until further analysis 
is complete.

 1. *Over-redaction:* Some items may have been redacted that are not
    employees, contractors, targets or otherwise related to the agency,
    but are, for example, authors of documentation for otherwise public
    projects that are used by the agency.
 2. *Identity vs. person:* the redacted names are replaced by user IDs
    (numbers) to allow readers to assign multiple pages to a single
    author. Given the redaction process used a single person may be
    represented by more than one assigned identifier but no identifier
    refers to more than one real person.
 3. *Archive attachments (zip, tar.gz, ...)* are replaced with a PDF
    listing all the file names in the archive. As the archive content is
    assessed it may be made available; until then the archive is redacted.
 4. *Attachments with other binary content* are replaced by a hex dump
    of the content to prevent accidental invocation of binaries that may
    have been infected with weaponized CIA malware. As the content is
    assessed it may be made available; until then the content is redacted.
 5. The *tens of thousands of routable IP addresses references*
    (including more than 22 thousand within the United States) that
    correspond to possible targets, CIA covert listening post servers,
    intermediary and test systems, are redacted for further exclusive
    investigation.
 6. *Binary files of non-public origin* are only available as dumps to
    prevent accidental invocation of CIA malware infected binaries.


      Organizational Chart

The organizational chart 
<https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/files/org-chart.png> corresponds to the 
material published by WikiLeaks so far.

Since the organizational structure of the CIA below the level of 
Directorates is not public, the placement of the EDG and its branches 
within the org chart of the agency is reconstructed from information 
contained in the documents released so far. It is intended to be used as 
a rough outline of the internal organization; please be aware that the 
reconstructed org chart is incomplete and that internal reorganizations 
occur frequently.


      Wiki pages

"Year Zero" contains 7818 web pages with 943 attachments from the 
internal development groupware. The software used for this purpose is 
called Confluence, a proprietary software from Atlassian. Webpages in 
this system (like in Wikipedia) have a version history that can provide 
interesting insights on how a document evolved over time; the 7818 
documents include these page histories for 1136 latest versions.

The order of named pages within each level is determined by date (oldest 
first). Page content is not present if it was originally dynamically 
created by the Confluence software (as indicated on the re-constructed 
page).


      What time period is covered?

The years 2013 to 2016. The sort order of the pages within each level is 
determined by date (oldest first).

WikiLeaks has obtained the CIA's creation/last modification date for 
each page but these do not yet appear for technical reasons. Usually the 
date can be discerned or approximated from the content and the page 
order. If it is critical to know the exact time/date contact WikiLeaks.


      What is "Vault 7"

"Vault 7" is a substantial collection of material about CIA activities 
obtained by WikiLeaks.


      When was each part of "Vault 7" obtained?

Part one was obtained recently and covers through 2016. Details on the 
other parts will be available at the time of publication.


      Is each part of "Vault 7" from a different source?

Details on the other parts will be available at the time of publication.


      What is the total size of "Vault 7"?

The series is the largest intelligence publication in history.


      How did WikiLeaks obtain each part of "Vault 7"?

Sources trust WikiLeaks to not reveal information that might help 
identify them.


      Isn't WikiLeaks worried that the CIA will act against its staff to
      stop the series?

No. That would be certainly counter-productive.


      Has WikiLeaks already 'mined' all the best stories?

No. WikiLeaks has intentionally not written up hundreds of impactful 
stories to encourage others to find them and so create expertise in the 
area for subsequent parts in the series. They're there. Look. Those who 
demonstrate journalistic excellence may be considered for early access 
to future parts.


      Won't other journalists find all the best stories before me?

Unlikely. There are very considerably more stories than there are 
journalists or academics who are in a position to write them.

-- 
Freedom Archives 522 Valencia Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415 
863.9977 www.freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20170307/86b21443/attachment.htm>


More information about the News mailing list