CENTRAL BANKS HACKED, BUT WHAT AREN'T THEY SAYING?

CENTRAL BANKS HACKED, BUT WHAT AREN’T THEY SAYING?

Many readers sent various versions of the first article here, which formes the backdrop for the second article, and today's high octane speculations. Please note: last Thursday's News and Views was cancelled because I was unable to obtain assistance with the new upgrades we're making, so today's blog is essentially what I recorded, but was unable to upload, to You Tube.

So what's today's  blog (and last Thursday's News and Views) about?  Well, someone is hacking central banks, in particular, the New York Federal Reserve:

http://www.cutimes.com/2016/05/16/hackers-steal-81-million-from-new-york-fed?ref=rss&slreturn=1463676653&page=2

Now note the last paragraph of this article:

“The attackers clearly exhibit a deep and sophisticated knowledge of specific operational controls within the targeted banks, knowledge that may have been gained from malicious insiders or cyberattacks, or a combination of both,” Morey Haber, vice president of technology at the Phoenix-based BeyondTrust, said. “The hackers allegedly learned from internal resources what systems need to be attacked, whom to contact, and what vulnerabilities should be leveraged. The art of the hack then became a simple exploit to exercise due to the insider threat.”

So what do we have? In this article we have (1) "hackers" have hacked the NY Federal Reserve, with no mention of who the suspects might be, and (2) the statement is made that "knowledge... may have been gained from malicious insiders or cyberattacks, or a combination of both."

Say that again? "Maliscious insiders"?  Now, I don't know about you, but "maliscious insiders" sounds an awful lot like moles.

Stop and let that one sink in for a bit: moles... inside the NY Federal Reserve... aiding computer hackers...

Now, while you're considering that, consider this second article:

EXCLUSIVE: Anonymous Strikes the Heart of the Empire — Takes Down U.S. Federal Reserve Bank

Now note the following statement, allegedly made by the hacking consortium/cabal Anonymous:

“The banks have been getting away with murder, fraud, conspiracy, war profiteering, money laundering for terrorists and drug cartels, have put millions of people out on the street without food or shelter and have successfully bought all our governments to help keep us silenced. We represent the voice of the voiceless. We are uniting to make a stand. The central banks which were attacked in recent days were attacked to remind people that the biggest threat we face to an open and free society is the banks. The bankers are the problem and #OpIcarus is the solution.”

Operation Icarus was relaunched in conjunction with a video release announcing the beginning of a “30-day campaign against central bank sites across the world.” Since that time, the scope and magnitude of the attacks have increased exponentially, with Anonymous, Ghost Squad Hackers, a number of Sec groups and BannedOffline coordinating attacks — each focusing on separate financial institutions in an effort to maximize the number of targets hit.

Now let's assume, for the sake of argument and for the sake of today's high octane speculation, that (1) the second article is true in its assertions, and that (2) the two stories are connected. What does this imply? well, for one thing, It implies that the "moles" and Anonymous are related, and that Anonymous is much more than just a cyber-hacking group, but rather, it is also running intelligence and covert operations. This would make it a much more sophisticated player than has hitherto been thought, and the mere possibility of moles - especially in an "expanded target list" such as is being suggested in the second article - means that virtually any and every central bank, including the "heavyweights" like the Bank of France, the Bank of England, and so on, might be infected with Anonymous moles. This would make the group a global network, and very definitely a "player".

The question is, is it truly an independent group? or is it connected to or a front for some other power, Russia or China perhaps? Or, in yet another possibility, is it an independent group that sometimes contracts for others? Any way one slices it, if any of these speculations are anywhere close to the reality, then it has to have quite a few central bankers sleepless.

And, it means one more thing: these digital clearing networks are not secure, and that means think twice about crypto currencies and "going cashless."

See you on the flip side...

34 thoughts on “CENTRAL BANKS HACKED, BUT WHAT AREN’T THEY SAYING?”

  1. Well back in the good old days I was a lurker on 4chanB when Anonymous first started. To me it seemed like a very organic development, however, by now they are most likely co-opted. In my opinion, the only way to understand Anon is to get into the mind of it’s members, to look at the psychology. Hacker culture is very unique. Anon culture is hacker culture to the extreme with a good deal of pathology and extreme intelligence thrown in, not that that’s a bad thing. I suggest the show Mr. Robot if anyone wants to catch a realistic glimpse of that culture.

    As far as my high octane speculation goes…according to the following RT article, Tor creator and former member of Anon worked for the FBI and FTI Financial to track the Silk Road/darknet drug trafficking and bit coins. The Feds usually end up catching these hackers and flipping them. I also look at Trump siding with the FBI over the Apple backdoor scandal. Hitlery is clearly team neocon CIA. I’m thinking we might be witnessing some factional infighting here, some FBI/anon vs CIA/DOJ/banks kind of action action.

    https://www.rt.com/usa/341299-former-tor-developer-fbi/

    1. Guygrr,
      Mr. Robot’s writer , cutting-edge phenomenal.
      The culture portrayed was: uncompromising;
      dedicated to their cause.
      I wondered/How did this get past the censors?

      Another stellar recent sci-fi: expanse

    2. I’d just like to – respectfully – take an issue based on my experience with countercultures such as fine arts, SF, etc. I remember around 2001 I tried to get a job at a New Hampshire Ad Agency who had a promo talking about how country simple they were over graphics which could have come from ’60’s New York (Al Hansen, Yoko Ono, Robert Longo…). Things don’t change but people do.

      Probably most of the original Anonymous have been turned either by the FBI or some other group – unless they’ve just stopped. There are still a lot of script kiddies out there, some of whom are talented enough to learn how to do the “fun”. This doesn’t look like braggadocio to me – but it doesn’t look like one thing either. Factional infighting seems less likely than opportunistic claims of victimization by multiple actors.

  2. I’m getting old but if humanity want a better world all off humanity needs to chip in to make that happen.

    Don’t believe in the “Jesus” fly by or derivatives.

    1. Neru
      Transhumanism fills hopes and minds with dreams of becoming superhuman, but the fact of the matter is that the true goal is the removal of that pesky, human free will itself.

  3. Cyber hackers responsible for taking down the E financial system…
    It would seem the makings of a good film. Somehow the bad Russians and bad Chinese must be involved and have had this in their playbook all along. The idea of attaching blame to an outside entity for bad governmental/central bank management (of the dollar as reserve currency and looming global recession) is not a bad idea. Close the banks and the markets. Time to start up the Humvee’s. Benevolent IMF; please save us….

  4. The quote starting with “The banks have been getting away with…” is a most refreshing and honest evaluation of our current situation.

    On the plus side, I can imagine a loose group of intelligent, ethical geeks noting just-where the PTB can be hurt and having the huevos to go exactly after that area. Kudos. (And good hunting!)

    On the negative side, the PTB are known to plant insiders and provocateurs to ‘use’ any positive movement for their own purposes. I would caution Anonymous to ‘vet’ prospective members very closely, and to keep a very limited number of people aware of each other (compartmentalization/cells). You are dealing with very dangerous ‘professionals’. Again, kudos for your bravery…

    1. Perhaps it’s all a psyops. Perhaps the owners hired hackers to pose as Anonymous to spy on the activities of the bank’s employees. Perhaps they are about to clean house and blame it on Anonymous certain pre-determined fall guys who have been set up to take the fall for some of the banks crimes. Perhaps it is alternatively just a ploy of some cyber security firm to get a huge new contract beefing up the banks cyber security and possibly install some updated spy ware while they are at it. This whole thing sounds fishy and isn’t likely what they are saying it is.

    2. Again based on my recent experience with younger geeks my reaction to all of this is “All of the Above” rather like Dr. Farrell’s view of the Kennedy assassination. And Powers that be is a good description. Despite the apparent conformity in 2600 magazine and Off the Hook those people are coming from – everywhere. While I don’t believe that they are gangsters I do think that gangsters and even banksters have people who are involved as well as there being people who either see or don’t what is going on (I’m not a hacker/cracker in that sense and I don’t advocate the appropriation of other peoples’ ideas or technology. I just listen to people who do because I try to listen to everyone).

      1. right on roger and jplatt,
        jeremy hammond’s bio gives a good case in point. think i’m going back to calling it the darpanet instead of interwebs any more

  5. Oops!
    A discouraging word, Prometheus, is fired across those richly amber waves of elitist gains…
    Lo-BOT-omized to the memory hole as of 7:22 pm.
    [at which time the arrow in the night reaches daylight]

  6. Most here are aware the elites have epical plans for the Prometheus-like future. Most are aware that 99.99+% have not been invited to that future.
    Part of that script has been to purposeful destruction on a grand scale; to accomplish goals, that otherwise would be unachievable – 9/11, for example. The destruction of the economy is something they’ve done countless times throughout their lame history of beefing-up their own cockroach nests.
    Bail-Ins are planned for the next chapter; followed by an IMF-backed cashless/soulless future: Promethean plans.
    Anonymous maybe an anvil in the fly’s ointment for them; if it becomes hijacked by radical elements bent on the destruction of the elite’ Prometheus plans – for those selfish, inhumanly prosperous .0001%.

  7. “Your comment is awaiting moderation”, May 21, 2016 at 5:48 pm.
    The nanny-bot strikes again.
    Shouldn’t have mentioned Charlie, India and Alpha, how silly of me.

  8. I have no doubt Anonymous is a (deep) state-sponsored entity.
    The question is, which one(s)?

    These aren’t just some script-kiddies sitting behind their PC in Bangladesh.
    If that’s where the finger is pointed, then they are just the patsies.
    Most likely expendable C-I-A assets.
    Hmm, where have we seen that before?

    1. Three hours later, and the comment has appeared.
      Next time, perhaps try something like this:
      “Hey Charlie, how is it going there in India?
      Alpha, good to hear from you, things are great, thanks for asking!”.

      See if that gets through.
      Unless I’ve made it onto the permanent Naughty Boy List.

      1. starting to think it’s just another form of harrassment
        it stopped for me when i started saving every page i wrote as pdf and reposting it within hours if it didn’t come up through the filters
        eventually one of my postings (or sometimes all of them) came through.
        ever since i get moderated once a month or so at most

        of course then too, i might be writing everything and then some that mr global’s smart boys (intel cretins that is) want written

        i might be saving the cretins time.
        hmm
        that internal dialogue that tells me its time to go mow the lawn

  9. To attack the Federal Reserve you have to dislike them, so who dislikes the Fed ???
    To me, this sounds like a group of people who are savvy in computer technology and want to make a buck at the same time. It also sounds like to me that it could be “that 3rd player” mixed up in 9/11.
    The global financial system could be taken down via hackers, with the EU starting to shatter, and most developing countries stumbling, it wouldn’t take much skullduggery to make a very large storm.
    Mr. Global maybe, but how many Mr. Global’ are there ??????

    1. that’s assuming that the fed is not in that list of who will attack the fed. irony here is does the fed dislike itself? or are we convinced that the fed won’t take itself down when the time comes to rip support of the fiat currency out from under mainstreet?

  10. Some of us do take Anonymous at their word – and understand therebye that they are a loose-knit group who are open to infiltration and cooptation by provocateurs and by other agents. In other words Russia, China, the Italian Mafia and modern Nazis and Communists almost certainly have influence over some of their members.In other words it like a technological version of Tobias Churton’s ideas about the Rosicrucians in that you invite yourself in.

    Therefore some of us believe that the answer to any such question is all of the above.

    Having worked in commercial offices as clerical and tech support (something I suspect you haven’t) since the eighties, I do have a cynical and jaundiced view of the habits of Our Corporate Masters (if you don’t have a Mac but can get one, do. If you can’t possibly afford it get either Debian or Fedora Linux). Most offices are run so shabbily that yes, teenagers could very well penetrate any company which uses Accenture and very likely the New York Fed.

    Of course if I had the evidence to prove I’m right I could never prove your high-end speculations wrong. Anonymous is too decentralized – still – to NOT be compromised.

    Come to think of it have you ever read William Burroughs? I heard him read at Brown University once – one of the most chilling people I ever encountered and he was on a stage. One of his own students – in a TRIBUTE in the Village Voice once called him a schizophrenic. He was extremely unpleasant, difficult to read and as prejudiced as he was anything else. He was also right about an awful awful lot and as I get older I realize more and more about how right he was.

    This is a case where my only issue with your idea is there is so much corruption and laziness in the world that while there may be malicious insiders and even Anonymous Sympathizers at the Fed, it doesn’t have to be Anonymous who did that hack (#1 and 2) Anonymous doesn’t seem to try for anything long-term enough to need consistent sponsorship – which makes sense if they are a loose alliance. More likely to the extent their boasts reflect reality they are talking about several groups with differing or no sponsors but some contact.

    1. look at the folk who’ve already been put in jail. jeremy hammond hack stratfor apparently at the govt’s behest to test stratfor until his handler turned states evidence against him and then a judge who owns shares in stratfor sentenced him.

      it’s easier to look at most likely scenarios. like anonymous is a brand and psyop produced by the mic/intel agencies to provocateur poor smart unwise naifs like hammond. not only do they bait their future enemies into coming out of the woodwork, they scare the rest into remaining quiet in the woodwork.

  11. The real issue is what is the bottomline of the banksters the illusion of pan-ultimate power. Their ultimate delusional high but for what end and do they really know what they are seeking or will their lust-greed possess them and destroy both them and the rest of us.

  12. Well the group Anonymous is supposed to have stopped Mitt Romney’s team from stealing the 2012 US presidential election–that’s whether or not Anonymous is some agent of another power (unlikely).

    1. How could they “steal” the election when Obama received more votes in some precincts than there were voters? That is news to me but certainly interesting. Worth a little research.

      1. By flipping Ohio and Virginia, via computer networks. Pretty much the way it was done in 2004.

        Where do you think Mitt was for those 45 minutes at 10:30PM in Boston? He was getting the message that the “souffle had fallen”–in other words Anonymous installed another layer of security software on the Ohio and Virginia vote data collection servers.

        Some particular precinct with an odd vote count is especially meaningless, unless it’s in a very very close state. Obama won the electoral college in 2012 fairly. Mittens was lazy.

    2. Funny. I just found this without much effort:

      https://medium.com/@spencergundert/hillary-clinton-and-electoral-fraud-992ad9e080f6#.jsbdqpvaw

      Over the years I have seen numerous examples like this story–including the claims of Anonymous. In the latter case we saw only the claim–but no offer of proof. Until people demand a more effective voting system our electronic system remains extremely vulnerable to manipulation by a variety of sources. A closely monitored electronic election is by its very nature an oxymoron. The push to an internet based solution sends chills down my spine because it not only affords rampant security vulnerabilities, but it also now links a vote back to an IP address. The possible repercussions of this scheme are truly frightening!

      1. i’m over it. george carlin gets more accurate every day. didn’t saddam hussein have near 100% voter turnout? and near 99% of the vote?

        1. Ah, George Carlin… I almost went there myself…

          At this stage, I am over it too. The only elections that matter these days are local–where you might have a chance to make a difference. It depends on the district I suppose.

      1. “barry” real way to win, sarc.

        Obama, like Mitt, is a product of Harvard law, both set up to defend Wall Street and the like–speculation for the sake of speculation instead of making things and services to trade with the world

        Mitt Romney could fairly easily have won in 2012–legitimately, but he was lazy and he hired really bad people. Doesn’t help that various people at the likes of Fox News grossly underestimate Obama’s intelligence and capacity to campaign well. Hillary Clinton sure did so in 2007/8 too. (I never voted for Obama.)

        I guess Mormons are more likely to be FBI than CIA.

        Tales of “jump rooms” are fun, and the claim sure overlaps with Alexanderson’s roomsized capacitors, used to this day in the long distance transmission of AC electricity. This all being more believable than “Obama is a plant of CIA”.

  13. Any alleged “alternative” / non main stream operation that has serious resources. Is suspect. Becuz, these days if you have $$$$$$$$$, your probably a state run and or operated entity. Whose is the question.

  14. Like many on this forum I am chronically suspicious about various parties, some with names and some “Anonymous”, who step forward announcing their benevolent intentions as the champions of the downtrodden.
    This episode looks like part of the ongoing conflict in the world of finance, and the strongest players are currently those who can intervene on web connections electronically or, if need be, physically.
    Now add to this the idea of MOLES inside the Fed and everything that implies, and “Mr. Global” will REALLY be losing some sleep. And maybe a few trillion bucks as well. We might look out for any ususual or unusually timed actions and statments by the central bank cabal, and deduce from that what sort of pressure they are responding to…

Comments are closed.