Filing indicates DOJ filed criminal charges against Julian …

Breaking News Emails

Get breaking news alerts and special reports. The news and stories that matter, delivered weekday mornings.

Nov. 16, 2018 / 7:11 AM GMT/ UpdatedNov. 16, 2018 / 9:29 PM GMT

By Ken Dilanian and Dennis Romero

A court document filed by mistake has revealed that the Justice Department has filed undisclosed criminal charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

In a slip unearthed by a former U.S. intelligence official and posted on Twitter, Assanges name appears twice in an August court filing by a federal prosecutor in Virginia an argument to keep sealed an unrelated case involving an accused child sex criminal.

The prosecutor wrote that the charges and arrest warrant would need to remain sealed until Assange is arrested in connection with the charges in the criminal complaint and can therefore no longer evade or avoid arrest and extradition in this matter.

At another point in the document, the prosecutor wrote that due to the sophistication of the defendant and the publicity surrounding the case, no other procedure is likely to keep confidential the fact that Assange has been charged.

It's not clear what allegations could be connected to the filing, which was a motion to seal a complaint and supporting documents in the unrelated case.

However, special counsel Robert Mueller earlier this year cited WikiLeaks participation in Russias efforts to interfere in the 2016 election. U.S. intelligence agencies have said that WikiLeaks disclosed thousands of emails stolen in a covert Russian intelligence operation to help Donald Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton.

Seamus Hughes, deputy director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University, noticed that Assange's name was in the filing, and he tweeted about it. Hughes is also a former official at the National Counterterrorism Center.

On Thursday night, WikiLeaks' Twitter account further publicized the filing.

Joshua Stueve, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, said in a statement that that court filing "was made in error. That was not the intended name for this filing."

The filing was first reported by The Washington Post.

WikiLeaks and Assange loom large in the investigation of Russian influence on the election.

The website released unflattering Hillary Clinton campaign emails beginning Oct. 7, 2016, just weeks before the presidential election.

Mueller, who's directing a federal inquiry into election meddling, in July charged 12 Russian intelligence officers with conspiring to hack Democratic National Committee computers in an effort to disrupt the 2016 election. The indictment referred to WikiLeaks as Organization 1, and described its role in receiving and disseminating the emails, without addressing whether Assange knew the material came from the Russians.

Barry Pollack, a U.S. lawyer representing Assange, criticized the move to charge the WikiLeaks founder.

The news that criminal charges have apparently been filed against Mr. Assange is even more troubling than the haphazard manner in which that information has been revealed, Pollack said in a statement. The government bringing criminal charges against someone for publishing truthful information is a dangerous path for a democracy to take.

In a statement Friday the director of the American Civil Liberties Unions Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, Ben Wizner, seemed to agree.

"Any prosecution of Mr. Assange for Wikileaks publishing operations would be unprecedented and unconstitutional, and would open the door to criminal investigations of other news organizations," he said. "Moreover, prosecuting a foreign publisher for violating U.S. secrecy laws would set an especially dangerous precedent for U.S. journalists, who routinely violate foreign secrecy laws to deliver information vital to the public's interest."

Mueller has been investigating whether anyone close to President Trumps 2016 campaign, including his longtime associate Roger Stone, acted as a conduit of stolen emails between WikiLeaks and the campaign.

WikiLeaks communicated through Twitter with the presidents son, Donald Trump Jr.

Assange came to prominence after WikiLeaks published secret military and diplomatic documents leaked in 2010 by Pvt. Chelsea Manning.

Manning served 7 years in prison, but WikiLeaks was not prosecuted. Justice Department lawyers concluded at the time that they could not charge Assange and WikiLeaks even as American newspapers, protected by the First Amendment, were publishing the leaked material.

But in recent years, U.S. officials have sought to distinguish WikiLeaks from journalists, as when then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo referred to it as a "hostile non-state intelligence organization." American officials came to view WikiLeaks as working hand in glove with American adversaries, particularly Russia.

In 2017, WikiLeaks published information about CIA hacking exploits, and last year a former government software engineer was charged with leaking that information. Officials said the disclosures were damaging to U.S. national security, and computer security experts criticized WikiLeaks for providing criminal hackers with new tools.

Assange, an Australian national, has lived at the Ecuadorean Embassy in London since being granted asylum in 2012 as he tried to avoid extradition to Sweden. Sweden's top prosecutor later dropped a long-running inquiry into a rape allegation against him, saying there was no way to detain or charge him because of his protected status in the embassy.

In a recent lawsuit, Assange said that Ecuador is changing the terms of his protection there.

CORRECTION (Nov. 15, 2018, 2:45 a.m. ET): An earlier version of this article misstated where Julian Assange is currently living. He is in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, not Ecuador.

Ken Dilanian is a national security reporter for the NBC News Investigative Unit.

Dennis Romero

Dennis Romero is a freelance reporter based in Los Angeles.

Associated Press contributed.

See the original post here:
Filing indicates DOJ filed criminal charges against Julian ...

Julian Assange has been charged in the United States …

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been charged under seal, prosecutors inadvertently revealed in a recently unsealed court filing a development that could significantly advance the probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election and have major implications for those who publish government secrets.

The disclosure came in a filing in a case unrelated to Assange. Assistant U.S. Attorney Kellen Dwyer, urging a judge to keep the matter sealed, wrote "due to the sophistication of the defendant and the publicity surrounding the case, no other procedure is likely to keep confidential the fact that Assange has been charged." Later, Dwyer wrote the charges would "need to remain sealed until Assange is arrested."

Dwyer is also assigned to the WikiLeaks case. People familiar with the matter said what Dwyer was disclosing was true, but unintentional.

Joshua Stueve, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Eastern District of Virginia said, "The court filing was made in error. That was not the intended name for this filing."

An FBI spokeswoman declined to comment.

Federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia have long been investigating Assange, and in the Trump administration had begun taking a second look at whether to charge members of the WikiLeaks organization for the 2010 leak of diplomatic cables and military documents which the anti-secrecy group published. Investigators also had explored whether WikiLeaks could face criminal liability for the more recent revelation of sensitive CIA cyber-tools.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller III has also exploring the publication by WikiLeaks of emails from the Democratic National Committee and the account of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. Officials have alleged the emails were hacked by Russian spies and transferred to WikiLeaks.

Mueller has also been exploring, among other things, communications between the group and associates of President Donald Trump, including political operative Roger Stone and commentator and conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi.

In July, his office charged 12 Russian military spies with conspiring to hack DNC computers, steal the organization's data and publish the files in an effort to disrupt the election and referred in an indictment to WikiLeaks, described only as "Organization 1," as the platform the Russians used to release the stolen emails.

A spokesman for the special counsel's office declined to comment.

It was not immediately clear what charges Assange would face. In the past, prosecutors had contemplated pursuing a case involving conspiracy, theft of government property or violating the Espionage Act. But whether to charge the WikiLeaks founder was hardly a foregone conclusion. In the Obama administration, the Justice Department had concluded that pursuing Assange would be akin to prosecuting a news organization. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, though, had taken a more aggressive stance and vowed to crack down on all government leaks.

Barry Pollack, one of Assange's attorneys, said, "The only thing more irresponsible than charging a person for publishing truthful information would be to put in a public filing information that clearly was not intended for the public and without any notice to Mr. Assange. Obviously, I have no idea if he has actually been charged or for what, but the notion that the federal criminal charges could be brought based on the publication of truthful information is an incredibly dangerous precedent to set."

The filing in the Eastern District of Virginia came on August 22, in a case that combines national security and sex trafficking. Seitu Sulayman Kokayi, 29, was charged with enticing a 15-year-old girl to have sex with him and send him pornographic images of herself. But he was detained in part, according to the court filing, because he "has a substantial interest in terrorist acts."

His father-in-law, according to the filing, has been convicted of terrorist acts. The case involves previously classified information, according to government filings, and prosecutors plan to use information obtained under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Kokayi was indicted last week and is set to be arraigned Friday morning.

The case had been sealed until early September, though by itself it attracted little notice. On Thursday evening, Seamus Hughes, the deputy director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University who is known for scrubbing court filings, joked about the apparent error on Twitter which first brought it to the attention of reporters.

Even if he is charged, Assange's coming to the United States to face trial is no sure thing. Since June 2012, Assange has been living in the Ecuadorian embassy, afraid that if he steps outside he will be arrested.

When he first sought asylum in the embassy, he was facing possible extradition to Sweden in a sex crimes case. He has argued that case was a pretext for what he predicted would be his arrest and extradition to the United States.

In the years since, the Swedish case has been closed, but Assange has said he cannot risk leaving the embassy because the U.S. would attempt to have him arrested and extradited for disclosures of U.S. government secrets. Throughout that time, the U.S. has refused to say whether there are any sealed charges against Assange.

If Assange were to leave the embassy and be arrested by British authorities, he would likely still fight extradition in the British courts.

The Washington Post's Rachel Weiner and Ellen Nakashima contributed to this report.

Follow this link:
Julian Assange has been charged in the United States ...

Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrency Prices Are Crashing Again …

For months, the price of Bitcoin has been hovering around the mid-$6,000s mark. No longer. The most popular cryptocurrency has plummeted by 12% over the last day, hitting a value of little more than $5,500.

The total market capitalization for Bitcoin now stands at $96 billionthe first time the market cap has fallen below $100 billion since October last year. The total market cap for the entire cryptocurrency scene now stands at $181 billion.

Bitcoin is far from the only casualty, with cryptocurrency price charts all firmly in the red right now. XRP (Ripple), the second-biggest virtual coin, is down 9.2%, Ethereums Ether is down almost 13%, and Bitcoin Cash is down 8.7%.

So, volatility is back, butas is so often the caseits not entirely clear why that is.

One theory, touted by BKCM founder Brian Kelly on CNBC, is that the crash is being caused by disagreements over a hard fork in Bitcoin Cash.

Hard forks are where a major software upgrade takes place on a cryptocurrency, essentially creating a new cryptocurrency (with free coins for existing coin holders) while leaving the old one intactthats how Bitcoin Cash formed in the first place, and now its doing it again. There is no majority agreement in the Bitcoin Cash community over which version would be best, though.

IMF chief Christine Lagarde also hit the headlines on Wednesday by calling for more countries to explore the potential of digital currenciesbut central-bank-backed digital currencies, not Bitcoin-style cryptocurrencies.

A few countries such as Sweden, China and Canada are already exploring this idea, with a key driver being maintaining the safety of currency-using consumers. There is a possibility that, if such schemes come to fruition, they could encourage regulators to crack down on competing cryptocurrencies that offer no such protections.

View post:
Bitcoin and Other Cryptocurrency Prices Are Crashing Again ...

Cryptocurrency Fraud Is the Exception, Not the Rule

Cryptocurrencyandblockchainare revolutionary technologies, but being so far ahead of the curve comes with consequences. With few precedents to learn from and regulatory frameworks still in their infancy, the crypto space has attracted its share of shrewd opportunists whose scams such as the infamous pump-and-dump schemes have grabbed international headlines.

Tech giants likeFacebook and Googlerecently placed a ban on crypto ads to combat the spread of shady coin offerings, and U.S. regulators like theCommodity Futures Trading Commissionand theSecurities and Exchange Commissionare investigating cryptocurrencies for price manipulation and other forms of fraud.

Pump-and-dump schemes arent new nor are they limited to the cryptocurrency space (just askJordan Belfort). That said, the growing popularity ofblockchain technology, combined with a lack of general public understanding, make the space a breeding ground for these types of ploys. Meanwhile, social media channels like Twitter, Telegram, and Reddit add a new level of speed and scale to the process.

So how do they work? Those who are in on the pump-and-dump scheme form groups,often with thousands of others, and overhype the trading volume of a coin. Then, once people are willing to buy in at grossly inflated prices, the perpetrators dump their holdings for a massive profit.

Its becoming so commonplace that the SEC created the aptly-namedHoweyCoinswebsite to help investorsspot signs of a crypto scheme. Not long ago, we also saw the crypto community take a hard line againstBancors Twitter giveaway, accusing it of normalizing the language and promotional techniques commonly abused by scammers.

The pressure is on for cryptocurrencies to prove their legitimacy, and I dont blame people for being wary of them. But I also know that for every scam, there are countless examples of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology being used responsibly to create opportunities, grow economies, and do good in the world. We need to remember that cryptocurrency fraud is the exception, not the rule.

For better or worse, cryptocurrency has become known as a get-rich-quick industry one where people enter the market without much awareness of the technology or its unique implications.

We saw the price of Bitcoin skyrocket tounprecedented levelsin late 2017 whichnew researchasserts was driven by furtive actions of a few big players, rather than real investor demand. Regardless, the spike resulted in a rush of new currencies, wallets, and exchanges, many of which were poorly planned at best andoutright fraudulent at worst.

And of course, legitimate services attract fake copycats. For instance,an app posing as MyEtherWallet, one of the most popular services for storing Ethereum and other coins, rose to the top of Apples App Store charts in December 2017 before it was revealed to be a scam. Although these sorts of scams have nothing to do specifically with cryptocurrency or blockchain and are basically akin to phishing, they still create a widespread negative perception of cryptocurrency as a whole.

But just because scams may have dominated the news cycle for a while doesnt mean investing in cryptocurrency is a fools errand. The same principles of sound investing tracking trends, diversifying, and weathering volatility apply to crypto. And theres no replacement for due diligence before putting your money into a project, regardless of whether its on the blockchain.

That said, with so many investors losing money to market manipulation fraud, it was only a matter of time before regulators stepped in.

Although government policy has struggled to keep pace with cryptocurrency, weve gotten to a point where regulators are stepping in and taking highly punitive action against pump-and-dump schemes in cryptocurrency.

In the United States, most state and federal regulators deal with crypto projects on a case-by-case basis. Take the CFTCs charges of fraud and misappropriation of funds against Patrick McDonnell. McDonnellallegedly promoted himself as an expertin cryptocurrency investment and promised clients returns of up to 300 percent; yet after receiving payment, hed sever all communication without providing anything in return. TheMcDonnell rulingtreated cryptocurrency as a commodity, which allows the CFTC to assert jurisdiction over players engaged in related schemes.

Meanwhile, the case betweenMaksim Zaslavskiyand the SEC dealt with an alleged ICO scam. About 1,000 people invested in Zaslavskiys project, but it became apparent that neither a token nor a digital asset was issued to investors, and no real blockchain technology was playing a role in his ICO. The Zaslavskiy ruling treated cryptocurrency as a security, which could encourage regulators to focus on registration issues a potential snare for players launching ICOs without abiding by the SECs registration requirements.

Cases like these show that regulators are testing several judicial theories and practices, and their rulings will set the precedent for future enforcement in an area where laws lag behind tech advancements.

Because cryptocurrency spans across so many legislative districts, its hard to get everyone to agree on the same path going forward. That said, Id like to try to provide a basic framework for what a legitimate blockchain project should look like.

The first thing any organization should do when considering an ICO launch is ensure it meets the SECs security offering requirements. Its worth bearing in mind that the SEC has never approved any crypto-related assets for listing and trading, so be careful if you come across an ICO claiming to be SEC-approved. But we can begin building a better, more reliable investment framework by complying with regulations in advance. As weve seen, legislation and regulation tend to follow technological innovation so innovators can save time and reduce friction by leading the way responsibly.

One of the most important stipulations for publicly traded companies approved by the SEC is transparency and transparency is one of the main reasons why blockchain-based transactions were invented in the first place. Along with being publicly visible and accountable, organizations should work with regulatory bodies in any jurisdiction they plan to operate in. Criminals tend to avoid the law, and if an ICO has nothing to hide, it should have no problem cooperating with regulators. This is fundamental to building trust among cryptocurrency investors, professionals, and the broader global community.

In the past, proponents of cryptocurrency have championed its potential for deregulation, decentralization, and anonymity but weve seen firsthand that where controls are too sparse, fraud runs rampant. And while not everyone agrees on the extent to which the cryptocurrency space should be regulated, I think we can all agree that without trust in each other, in the rules, and in regulators to enforce those rules effectively we cant have a functioning system of investment and exchange.

As cryptocurrency continues to evolve, its important to continue supporting groups working for the good of others while calling out those who are trying to game the system. If we, as a community, cooperate with regulators and invest in companies that are adding value to the world, we can change how the world sees cryptocurrency.

Cale Moodie is CEO and director of Neptune Dash, a cryptocurrency company that constructs and operates masternodes of Dash, a digital currency built on the blockchain.

See the original post:
Cryptocurrency Fraud Is the Exception, Not the Rule

Security and encryption | Documentation | Turtl

Turtl uses encryption to protect your data in such a way that only you, andthose you choose, are able to view your data. Keep reading for a high-leveloverview of Turts encryption and how it protects you.

Simply put, encryption is the process of scrambling data. Generally, this isdone using a key which is usually a passphrase. The only way to de-scramblethe data is using that passphrase.

Turtls encryption works by generating a key for you based on youremail and password. This key is used to lock and unlock (or encrypt anddecrypt) your data and keep it private. All of the encryption in Turtl happensbefore any data leaves the app, meaning that even if someone is snooping in onyour connection or someone hacks our database, everything youve put into Turtlis just gibberish to them.

Without the keys that only you hold, your data is useless.

As mentioned, Turtl creates a key for you when you log in based on your emailand password. It wouldnt be very useful if you had to give people this key whenyou shared data with them because it would give them access to all your data.Instead, Turtl generates a new, random key for each object. This key is whatis sent to people when sharing, allowing them to unlock the specific item yousend them and nothing else.

Keys are stored one of two ways:

If youre looking for a more comprehensive look at how Turtl does encryption,check out the encryption specifics page of the docswhich goes over the ciphers, block modes, and other methods Turtl uses whenhandling your data.

Encryption specifics

Turtl has a feature that keeps you logged in if the app is closed and reopened.This feature may have security implications. Read more about the Stay logged infeature.

Here are some possible scenarios where Turtls security measures will fail you.We try to provide an exhaustive list so youre aware of the dangers of relyingon Turtl.

Read the original:
Security and encryption | Documentation | Turtl

WikiLeaks’ Assange faces charges; lawyer says he’d fight

WASHINGTON (AP) WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will not willingly travel to the United States to face charges filed under seal against him, one of his lawyers said Friday, foreshadowing a possible fight over extradition for a central figure in the U.S. special counsels Russia-Trump investigation.

Assange, who has taken cover in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he has been granted asylum, has speculated publicly for years that the Justice Department had brought secret criminal charges against him for revealing highly sensitive government information on his website.

That hypothesis appeared closer to reality after prosecutors, in an errant court filing in an unrelated case, inadvertently revealed the existence of sealed charges. The filing, discovered Thursday night, said the charges and arrest warrant would need to remain sealed until Assange is arrested in connection with the charges in the criminal complaint and can therefore no longer evade or avoid arrest and extradition in this matter.

A person familiar with the matter, speaking on condition of anonymity because the case had not been made public, confirmed that charges had been filed under seal. The exact charges Assange faces and when they might be unsealed remained uncertain Friday.

The DOJ inadvertently named Julian Assange in a court filing in an unrelated case, suggesting they have prepared charges against the WikiLeaks founder under seal. Any charges could shed light on whether Russia coordinated with Trump's campaign.(Nov. 16)

Any charges against him could help illuminate whether Russia coordinated with the Trump campaign to sway the 2016 presidential election. They also would suggest that, after years of internal Justice Department wrangling, prosecutors have decided to take a more aggressive tack against WikiLeaks.

A criminal case also holds the potential to expose the practices of a radical transparency activist who has been under U.S. government scrutiny for years and at the center of some of the most explosive disclosures of stolen information in the last decade.

Those include thousands of diplomatic cables from Army Pvt. Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning, secret CIA hacking tools, and most recently and notoriously, Democratic emails that were published in the weeks before the 2016 presidential election and that U.S. intelligence officials say had been hacked by Russia.

Special counsel Robert Mueller, who has already charged 12 Russian military intelligence officers with hacking, has been investigating whether any Trump associates had advance knowledge of the stolen emails.

Assange could be an important link for Mueller as he looks to establish exactly how WikiLeaks came to receive the emails, and why its dump of stolen communications from Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta beginning just after a damaging video of Trump from a decade earlier publicly surfaced appeared timed to boost the Trump campaign.

Assange, 47, has resided in the Ecuadorian Embassy under a grant of asylum for more than six years to avoid being extradited to Sweden, where he was accused of sex crimes, or to the United States, whose government he has repeatedly humbled with mass disclosures of classified information.

The Australian was once a welcome guest at the embassy, which takes up part of the ground floor of a stucco-fronted apartment in Londons posh Knightsbridge neighborhood. But his relationship with his hosts has soured over the years amid reports of espionage, erratic behavior and diplomatic unease.

Barry Pollack, a Washington lawyer for Assange, said he expected Ecuador to comply with its obligations to preserve asylum for him, though he acknowledged a concern that the county could revoke his asylum, expel him from the embassy and facilitate an extradition to the U.S.

The burden should not shift to Mr. Assange to have to defend against criminal charges when what he has been accused of doing is what journalists do every day, Pollack said. They publish truthful information because the public has a right to know and consider that information and understand what its government and institutions are doing.

The charges came to light in an unrelated court filing from a federal prosecutor in Virginia, who was attempting to keep sealed a separate case involving a man accused of coercing a minor for sex.

The three-page filing contained two references to Assange, including one sentence that said due to the sophistication of the defendant and the publicity surrounding the case, no other procedure is likely to keep confidential the fact that Assange has been charged.

It was not immediately clear why Assanges name was included in the document. Joshua Stueve, a spokesman for the Justice Departments Eastern District of Virginia said, The court filing was made in error. That was not the intended name for this filing.

The filing was discovered by Seamus Hughes, a terrorism expert at the Program on Extremism at George Washington University, who posted it on Twitter hours after The Wall Street Journal reported that the Justice Department was preparing to prosecute Assange.

The case at issue concerns a defendant named Seitu Sulayman Kokayi, a 29-year-old teacher who has since been indicted on charges of enticing a 15-year-old girl to commit sex acts and to produce child pornography. There doesnt appear to be any connection between Assange and Kokayi.

The since-unsealed document, a motion filed in late August, mentions Assange in two boilerplate sections, suggesting a copy-and-paste error or that his name was inadvertently left in a template used for the common filings.

The filing suggests prosecutors have reason to believe they will be able to arrest and extradite Assange.

Ecuadorian officials say they have cut off his high-speed internet access and will restore it only if he agrees to stop interfering in the affairs of Ecuadors partners, such as the U.S. and Spain. He is allowed to use the embassys WiFi, though it is unclear if he doing so. Officials have also imposed a series of other restrictions on Assanges activities and visitors, and ordered him to clean after his cat.

Carlos Poveda, Assanges lawyer in Ecuador, said he suspects Ecuador has been maneuvering to kick Assange out of the embassy through the stricter new living requirements it recently imposed.

He said possible U.S. charges, however, are proof his client remains under threat, and he called on Ecuadors government to uphold Assanges asylum protections. He said Ecuador would be responsible if anything happened to Assange.

With shrinking options an Ecuadorian lawsuit seeking to reverse the restrictions was recently turned down WikiLeaks announced in September that former spokesman Kristinn Hrafnsson, an Icelandic journalist who has long served as one of Assanges lieutenants, would take over as editor-in-chief.

In a brief interview in Reykjavik, Iceland, Hrafnsson called the U.S. news a very black day for journalism.

___

Associated Press writer Raphael Satter in Paris, Chad Day in Washington and Egill Bjarnason in Iceland contributed to this report.

Link to court filing: http://apne.ws/Me9YxB9

Read the original here:
WikiLeaks' Assange faces charges; lawyer says he'd fight

WikiLeaks: Julian Assange Charged in U.S. | Breitbart

Prosecutors revealed the existence of the sealed indictment inadvertently in a court filing in an unrelated case, WikiLeaks said.

The exact nature of the charges against Assange was not immediately known.

SCOOP: US Department of Justice accidentally reveals existence of sealed charges (or a draft for them) against WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange in apparent cut-and-paste error in an unrelated case also at the Eastern District of Virginia, Wikileaks wrote on Twitter.

The still unsealed charges against Assange were disclosed by Assistant US Attorney Kellen Dwyer as she made a filing in the unrelated case and urged a judge to keep that filing sealed.

Dwyer wrote, due to the sophistication of the defendant and the publicity surrounding the case, no other procedure is likely to keep confidential the fact that Assange has been charged, according to The Washington Post.

Later, Dwyer wrote the charges would need to remain sealed until Assange is arrested.

US media were alerted late Thursday to the inadvertent disclosure thanks to a tweet from Seamus Hughes, deputy director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University. He is known to follow court filings closely.

Go here to read the rest:
WikiLeaks: Julian Assange Charged in U.S. | Breitbart

How the Trump Administration Stepped Up Pursuit of WikiLeaks …

WikiLeaks encouraged Guccifer 2.0, the online persona of the Russian operatives, to provide it with the Democratic documents because it would have a much higher impact, according to court papers.

Whether anyone connected with the Trump campaign worked with Mr. Assange or others to carry out Russias scheme to interfere in the 2016 presidential race is at the heart of Mr. Muellers inquiry.

So far, no evidence has publicly emerged that anyone in the Trump campaign conspired with Moscows disruption, and Mr. Trump has repeatedly denied any collusion with Russia. But the special counsels office continues to summon witnesses before a federal grand jury, asking about interactions between allies of Mr. Trump and Mr. Assange through intermediaries or other means.

What has become abundantly clear since the election is that various associates of Mr. Trumps tried their best to figure out what information Mr. Assange possessed, how it might harm the Clinton campaign and when he planned to release it.

About a month before the election, for instance, Donald Trump Jr., a key adviser to his father, sent WikiLeaks a private message on Twitter asking about speculation that Mr. Assange planned to soon release documents that would prove devastating to Mrs. Clinton. Whats behind this Wed leak I keep reading about? he asked. He has said he got no response and never corresponded with WikiLeaks again.

Charges against Mr. Assange would be a big step, said Joshua Geltzer, a former official in the Justice Departments national security division. But, he added, the precise nature of the charges may not be known until Mr. Assange is in the custody of American officials. Mr. Assange has lived in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London since 2012, forced there as he sought refuge from Swedish prosecutors who pursued him on charges of sexual abuse.

The government has certainly been concerned about and looking at Assange for a long time, Mr. Geltzer said. Ultimately, the stakes are high in this one, given the complexities of the case, and the government must be prepared for that going in.

View post:
How the Trump Administration Stepped Up Pursuit of WikiLeaks ...

Glenn Greenwald – Wikipedia

Glenn Edward Greenwald (born March 6, 1967) is an American lawyer, journalist, and author, best known for his role in a series of reports published by The Guardian newspaper beginning in June 2013, detailing the United States and British global surveillance programs, and based on classified documents disclosed by Edward Snowden.[3][4] Greenwald and the team he worked with won both a George Polk Award and a Pulitzer Prize for those reports. He has written several best-selling books, including No Place to Hide.

Greenwald's work on the Snowden story was featured in the documentary Citizenfour, which won the 2014 Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature. Greenwald appeared on-stage with director Laura Poitras and Snowden's girlfriend, Lindsay Mills, when the Oscar was given.[5] In the 2016 Oliver Stone feature film Snowden, Greenwald was played by actor Zachary Quinto.[6]

Before the Snowden file disclosures, Greenwald was considered one of the most influential opinion columnists in the United States.[7] After working as a constitutional attorney for ten years, he began blogging on national security issues before becoming a Salon contributor in 2007 and then moving to The Guardian in 2012. He currently writes for and co-edits The Intercept, which he founded in 2013 with Laura Poitras and Jeremy Scahill.

Greenwald was born in New York City to Arlene and Daniel Greenwald.[8] Greenwald's family moved to Lauderdale Lakes, Florida when he was an infant.[9][10][11] His parents are Jewish and they and his grandparents tried to introduce him to Judaism, but he grew up without practicing an organized religion, did not have a bar mitzvah, and has said his "moral precepts aren't informed in any way by religious doctrine".[12] He received a BA in Philosophy from George Washington University in 1990 and a JD from New York University School of Law in 1994.[9][11]

Greenwald practiced law in the Litigation Department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz (19941995); in 1996 he co-founded his own litigation firm, called Greenwald Christoph & Holland (later renamed Greenwald Christoph PC), where he litigated cases concerning issues of U.S. constitutional law and civil rights.[9][10] One of his higher-profile cases was the representation of white supremacist Matthew F. Hale.[13]

About his work in First Amendment speech cases, Greenwald told Rolling Stone magazine in 2013, "to me, it's a heroic attribute to be so committed to a principle that you apply it not when it's easy ... not when it supports your position, not when it protects people you like, but when it defends and protects people that you hate".[14]

Later, according to Greenwald, "I decided voluntarily to wind down my practice in 2005 because I could, and because, after ten years, I was bored with litigating full-time and wanted to do other things which I thought were more engaging and could make more of an impact, including political writing."[10]

In October 2005, he began his blog Unclaimed Territory focusing on the investigation pertaining to the Plame affair, the CIA leak grand jury investigation, the federal indictment of Scooter Libby and the NSA warrantless surveillance (200107) controversy. In April 2006, the blog received the 2005 Koufax Award for "Best New Blog".[9]

In February 2007, Greenwald became a contributing writer for the Salon website, and the new column and blog superseded Unclaimed Territory, although Salon prominently features hyperlinks to it in Greenwald's dedicated biographical section.[15][16]

Among the frequent topics of his Salon articles were the investigation of the 2001 anthrax attacks and the candidacy of former CIA official John O. Brennan for the jobs of either Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (D/CIA) or the next Director of National Intelligence (DNI) after the election of Barack Obama. Brennan withdrew his name from consideration for the post after opposition centered in liberal blogs and led by Greenwald.[17][18][19][20][21][22] Brennan took up the leadership position at the CIA again, in March 2013.

Greenwald left Salon on August 20, 2012, for the American offshoot of Britain's The Guardian newspaper, citing "the opportunity to reach a new audience, to further internationalize my readership, and to be re-invigorated by a different environment" as reasons for the move.[23]

On June 5, 2013, Greenwald was first to report on the top-secret United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order requiring Verizon to provide the National Security Agency with telephone metadata for all calls between the U.S. and abroad, as well as all domestic calls.[24][25][26] He was a columnist until October 2013.[27][28][29]

On October 15, 2013, Greenwald announced, and The Guardian confirmed, that he was leaving to pursue a "once-in-a-career dream journalistic opportunity that no journalist could possibly decline".[29][30] Financial backing for the new venture was provided by Pierre Omidyar, the eBay founder.[31][32] Omidyar told media critic Jay Rosen that the decision was fueled by his "rising concern about press freedoms in the United States and around the world". Greenwald, along with his colleagues Laura Poitras and Jeremy Scahill, initially were working on creating a place online to support independent journalism, when they were approached by Omidyar who was looking to start his own media organization. That news organization, First Look Media, launched its first online publication, called, The Intercept, on February 10, 2014.[33] Greenwald serves as editor, alongside Laura Poitras and Jeremy Scahill. The organization is incorporated as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt charitable entity.[34][35]

Greenwald has appeared as a round table guest on ABC's Sunday morning news show This Week, HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher, Comedy Central's The Colbert Report, NPR's All Things Considered, C-SPAN's Washington Journal; Pacifica Radio's syndicated series Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman;[36] on Public Radio International's To the Point; MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell, Up with Chris Hayes, Dylan Ratigan's Morning Meeting; Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume,[37] Tucker Carlson Tonight, and the Chapo Trap House podcast.[38]

Greenwald has been a regular guest on the Hugh Hewitt Show and on PBS's Bill Moyers Journal.[39][40][41]

On September 15, 2014, he was a headline speaker at Kim Dotcom's Moment of Truth town hall meeting held in Auckland, New Zealand.[42]

Greenwald's first book, How Would a Patriot Act? Defending American Values From a President Run Amok was published by Working Assets in 2006. It was a New York Times bestseller,[43] and ranked #1 on Amazon.com, both before its publication (due to orders based on attention from 'UT' readers and other bloggers) and for several days after its release, ending its first week at #293.[44]

A Tragic Legacy , his next book, examines the presidency of George W. Bush. Published in hardback by Crown (a division of Random House) on June 26, 2007, and reprinted in a paperback edition by Three Rivers Press on April 8, 2008, it was a New York Times Best Seller. Great American Hypocrites: Toppling the Big Myths of Republican Politics, was also first published by Random House in April 2008.[45][46] With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful, was released by Metropolitan Books in October 2011 and No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State, was released in May 2014.[47] The latter work spent six weeks on The New York Times Best Seller list,[48] and was named one of the ten Best Non-Fiction Books of 2014 by The Christian Science Monitor.[49]

Greenwald was initially contacted anonymously by Edward Snowden, a former contractor for the U.S. National Security Agency, in late 2012[50] indicating his possession of "sensitive documents" that he wished to share.[51] Greenwald found the measures that the source asked him to take to secure their communications too annoying to employ.[50] Snowden then contacted documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras about a month later in January 2013.[52]

According to The Guardian, what originally attracted Snowden to both Greenwald and Poitras was a Salon article penned by Greenwald detailing how Poitras' controversial films had made her a "target of the government".[51][53] Greenwald began working with Snowden in either February[54] or in April, after Poitras asked Greenwald to meet her in New York City, at which point Snowden began providing documents to them both.[50]

As part of the global surveillance disclosure, the first of Snowden's documents were published on June 5, 2013, in The Guardian in an article by Greenwald. According to him, Snowden's documents exposed the "scale of domestic surveillance under Obama".[55]

The series on which Greenwald worked contributed to The Guardian (alongside The Washington Post) winning the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 2014.[56][57]

In August 2013, the Metropolitan Police detained Greenwald's partner David Miranda at London's Heathrow Airport under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, after he had flown in from Berlin and was changing to a plane bound for home, in Rio de Janeiro.[58][59] His belongings were seized, including an external hard drive said to contain sensitive documents relevant to Greenwald's reporting, which was encrypted with TrueCrypt encryption software.[60]

Greenwald described his partner's detention as "clearly intended to send a message of intimidation to those of us who have been reporting on the NSA and GCHQ".[61] Miranda was detained for nine hours and his laptop and other items were seized. He has since attempted to sue the Metropolitan Police for misuse of their powers. According to The Guardian, the claim, "challenging controversial powers used under schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000, maintains that Miranda was not involved in terrorism and says his right to freedom of expression was curtailed".[62]

According to a later article in The Guardian, Miranda was found to have been carrying an external hard drive containing 58,000 highly classified UK intelligence documents, and his detention was ruled lawful by the UK High Court, which accepted that Miranda's detention and the seizure of computer material was "an indirect interference with press freedom", but said this was justified by legitimate and "very pressing" interests of national security.[63]

Members of the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) in the British Parliament said that allowing police to stop and search suspects at airports without suspicion was "not inherently incompatible" with human rights. MPs and peers said they agreed anti-terror officers should be able to "stop, question, request documentation and physically search persons and property" even when they did not have reasonable suspicion that an offence had been committed, but urged the government to introduce new restrictions on powers such as strip-searches, detentions, and searches of the contents of electronic devices such as laptops and smart phones, and said that these "more intrusive" measures should take place only when officers had reasonable suspicion that someone was involved in terrorism.[64]

In December 2013, Greenwald and Miranda advocated for asylum in Brazil for Edward Snowden in exchange for the fugitive leaker's cooperation in investigating the NSA.[65] Brazil's government indicated it was not interested in investigating the NSA.[66]

In a statement delivered before the National Congress of Brazil in early August 2013, Greenwald testified that the U.S. government had used counter-terrorism as a pretext for clandestine surveillance in order to compete with other countries in the "business, industrial and economic fields".[67][68][69]

On December 18, 2013, Greenwald told the European Union's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs that "most governments around the world are not only turning their backs on Edward Snowden but also on their ethical responsibilities".[70] Speaking via a video link, Greenwald asserted that, "It is the UK through their interception of underwater fibre optic cables, that is a primary threat to the privacy of European citizens when it comes to their telephone and emails". According to a statement given to the European Parliament by Greenwald:

The ultimate goal of the NSA, along with its most loyal, one might say subservient junior partner the British agency GCHQ when it comes to the reason why the system of suspicion of surveillance is being built and the objective of this system is nothing less than the elimination of individual privacy worldwide

Greenwald is critical of actions jointly supported by Democrats and Republicans, writing: "The worst and most tyrannical government actions in Washington are equally supported on a fully bipartisan basis."[72] In the preface to his first book, How Would a Patriot Act? (2006), Greenwald opens with some of his own personal political history describing his 'pre-political' self as neither liberal nor conservative as a whole, voting neither for George W. Bush nor for any of his rivals (indeed, not voting at all).[73]

Bush's election to the U.S. presidency "changed" Greenwald's previous uninvolved political attitude toward the electoral process "completely", and in 2006 he wrote:

"Over the past five years, a creeping extremism has taken hold of our federal government, and it is threatening to radically alter our system of government and who we are as a nation. This extremism is neither conservative nor liberal in nature, but is instead driven by theories of unlimited presidential power that are wholly alien, and antithetical, to the core political values that have governed this country since its founding"; for, "the fact that this seizure of ever-expanding presidential power is largely justified through endless, rank fear-mongeringfear of terrorists, specificallymeans that not only our system of government is radically changing, but so, too, are our national character, our national identity, and what it means to be American."[73]

Believing that "It is incumbent upon all Americans who believe in that system, bequeathed to us by the founders, to defend it when it is under assault and in jeopardy. And today it is", he said: "I did not arrive at these conclusions eagerly or because I was predisposed by any previous partisan viewpoint. Quite the contrary."[73]

Resistant to applying ideological labels to himself, he emphasized that he is a strong advocate for U.S. constitutional "balance of powers"[74] and for constitutionally-protected civil and political rights in his writings and public appearances.[9]

Greenwald frequently writes about the War on Drugs and criminal justice reform. He is a member of the advisory board of the Brazil chapter of Law Enforcement Action Partnership.[75] Greenwald was also the author of a 2009 white paper published by the Cato Institute entitled, Drug Decriminalization in Portugal: Lessons for Creating Fair and Successful Drug Policies, exploring the role of drug policy of Portugal.[77]

He criticized the policies of the Bush administration and those who supported it, arguing that most of the American "Corporate News Media" excused Bush's policies and echoed the administration's positions rather than asking hard questions.[36][78]

Regarding civil liberties during the Obama presidency, he elaborated on his conception of change when he said, "I think the only means of true political change will come from people working outside of that [two-party electoral] system to undermine it, and subvert it, and weaken it, and destroy it; not try to work within it to change it."[80] He did, however, raise money for Russ Feingold's 2010 Senate re-election bid,[81] Bill Halter's 2010 primary challenge to Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln,[82] as well as several Congressional candidates in 2012 described as "unique".[83]

Greenwald is critical of Israel's foreign policy and influence on U.S. politics, a stance for which he has in turn been the subject of criticism.

According to Greenwald, the emergence of ISIS is a direct consequence of the Iraq War and NATO-led military intervention in Libya.[84][85][86] Greenwald has criticized U.S. and UK involvement in Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen.[87] He wrote in October 2016: "The atrocities committed by the Saudis would have been impossible without their steadfast, aggressive support."[88]

Greenwald criticized the prison conditions in which U.S. Army Private Chelsea Manning, the convicted WikiLeaks whistleblower (then known as Bradley), was held after her arrest by military authorities.[89] As a supporter of Manning, Greenwald described her as "a whistle-blower acting with the noblest of motives" and "a national hero similar to Daniel Ellsberg."[90]

Greenwald has criticized many of the policies of the Trump administration.[91][92] He said: "I think the Trump White House lies more often. I think it lies more readily. I think it lies more blatantly."[92] Greenwald also criticized the Democrats' double standard, saying that "Democrats didn't care when Obama hugged Saudi despots, and now they pretend to care when Trump embraces Saudi despots or Egyptian ones."[92] He has also accused mainstream U.S. media of "spreading patriotic state propaganda".[93] Greenwald said that choosing between Trump and "whatever you want to call it. Call it the deep state, call it the national security blob, call it the CIA and the Pentagon", is like choosing between "Bashar al-Assad or al-Qaida or ISIS [in Syria] once the ordinary people of the Syrian revolution got defeated."[92]

Greenwald has expressed skepticism of the US intelligence community's assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.[94] Regardless of the accuracy of the assessment, Greenwald has doubted its significance, stating "some Russians wanted to help Trump win the election, and certain people connected to the campaign were receptive to receiving that help. Who the fuck cares about that?"[94] He sees Democrats' rhetoric on Russia as a more serious problem, characterizing it as "unhinged". Greenwald has commented that due to his skepticism of the significance of Russian interference in the 2016 election, he has been "excommunicated from the liberal salons that celebrated him in the Snowden era ... now anybody who questions the Russia consensus, "becomes a blasphemer. Becomes a heretic.[94] Greenwald also wrote that the "East Coast newsmagazines" are "feeding Democrats the often xenophobic, hysterical Russophobia for which they have a seemingly insatiable craving."[95] In a July 2018 panel on "fake news" in Moscow moderated by RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan, Greenwald argued that the Democrats' focus on Russian interference in the 2016 election is motivated by a need to rationalize Clinton's loss.[96][97]

Greenwald has been placed on numerous "top 50" and "top 25" lists of columnists in the United States.[98][99][100][101][102][103][104][105][106] In June 2012, Newsweek magazine named him one of America's Top Ten Opinionists, saying that "a righteous, controlled, and razor-sharp fury runs through a great deal" of his writing, and: "His independent persuasion can make him a danger or an asset to both sides of the aisle."[107]

According to Nate Anderson, writing in Ars Technica around 2010 or 2011, Aaron Barr of HBGary and Team Themis planned to damage Greenwald's career as a way to respond to a potential dump of Bank of America documents by WikiLeaks, saying that "Without the support of people like Glenn WikiLeaks would fold."[108]

Josh Voorhees, writing in slate.com, reported that in 2013 congressman Peter King (R-NY) suggested Greenwald should be arrested for his reporting on the NSA PRISM program and NSA leaker Edward Snowden.[109] Journalist Andrew Ross Sorkin said "I would arrest [Snowden] and now I'd almost arrest Glenn Greenwald",[110] but later made an apology for his statement, which Greenwald accepted.

Journalist David Gregory accused Greenwald of aiding and abetting Snowden, before asking, "Why shouldn't you, Mr. Greenwald, be charged with a crime?"[111]

In a 2013 interview with Martha Raddatz of ABC News, Greenwald said that members of Congress are being "blocked" from getting "the most basic information about what NSA is doing ... and what the FISA court has been doing ...", and specifically referenced Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), who at the time was the ranking member of the United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence ("House Intelligence Committee").[112] Ruppersberger, who was a guest on the show, responded, "We have rules as far as the committee and what you can have and what you cannot have. However, based on that, that statement I just made, is that since this incident occurred with Snowden, we've had three different hearings for members of our Democratic Caucus, and the Republican Caucus ... And we will continue to do that because what we're trying to do now is to get the American public to know more about what's going on." Rep. King, who was also a guest on This Week as a ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, stated: "[T]o me it's unprecedented to have all of these top people from an administration during this time of crisis still come in and answer question after question after question. So anyone who says that Congress is somehow being stonewalled is just wrong and [the question] is generally, I think, raised by people who are trying to make a name for themselves."[113]

In a February 2014 interview, Greenwald said he believed he risked detention if he reentered the U.S., but insisted that he would "force the issue" on principle, and return for the "many reasons" he had to visit, including if he won a prestigious award of which he was rumoured to be the winner.[114] Later that month, it was announced that he was, in fact, among the recipients of the 2013 Polk Awards, to be conferred April 11, 2014 in Manhattan.[115] In a subsequent interview, Greenwald stated he would attend the ceremony, and added: "I absolutely refuse to be exiled from my own country for the crime of doing journalism and I'm going to force the issue just on principle. And I think going back for a ceremony like the Polk Awards or other forms of journalistic awards would be a really good symbolic test of having to put the government in the position of having to arrest journalists who are coming back to the US to receive awards for the journalism they have done."[116] On April 11, Greenwald and Laura Poitras accepted the Polk Award in Manhattan. Although their entry into the United States was trouble-free, they traveled with an ACLU attorney and a German journalist "to document any unpleasant surprises". Accepting the award, Greenwald said he was "happy to see a table full of Guardian editors and journalists, whose role in this story is much more integral than the publicity generally recognizes".[117] On April 14, the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service was awarded jointly to The Guardian and The Washington Post for revelation of widespread secret surveillance by the NSA. Greenwald, along with Laura Poitras and Ewen MacAskill, had contributed to The Guardians reporting.[118]

In 2018, Greenwald was well-received at the International Cybersecurity Congress in Moscow at which Putin gave the keynote speech.[119] Speaking on the 6th of July 2018, Glen addressed several matters concerning "fake news". Panelists in attendance with Greenwald included Sergey Nalobin from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Alexei Venediktov and Giovanni Zagni.[120]

Greenwald lives in Rio de Janeiro, the hometown of his husband, David Miranda.[121][122][123] Greenwald said in 2011 that his residence in Brazil was a result of the Defense of Marriage Act, an American law barring federal recognition of same-sex marriages that was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court two years later. The law had prevented his partner from receiving a visa to reside with him in the United States.[124]

In 2017, Greenwald and Miranda announced that they had adopted two children, siblings, from Macei, a city in Northeastern Brazil.[125] Greenwald and Miranda have 24 rescue dogs.[126][127]

In 2016, Miranda was elected to the Rio de Janeiro City Council as part of the PSOL party.[128] Miranda is now running for Congress in Brazil's 2018 election.[121]

In March 2017, Greenwald announced plans to build a shelter with Miranda for stray pets in Brazil that would be staffed by homeless people.[129] As of March, 2018, Greenwald posted videos showing the shelter as operational with dozens of pets and "previously homeless employees." [130]

Greenwald and Miranda were close personal friends of Brazilian human rights advocate and councilwoman Marielle Franco, known for criticism of police tactics, who was fatally shot while in her car by unknown assailants.[131][132]

Greenwald comes from a Jewish background, albeit largely non-practicing, and was never Bar Mitzvahed, stating that "My parents tried to inculcate me a little bit into organized Judaism, but they weren't particularly devoted to that, and my grandparents were, but it just never took hold." He says that he does believe in "the spiritual and mystical part of the world", including practicing yoga, but his moral precepts "aren't informed in any way by religious doctrine or, like, organized religion or anything."[133] Greenwald has also been critical of the New Atheist movement, accusing Sam Harris and others within the movement of anti-Muslim animus.[134]

Greenwald received, together with Amy Goodman, the first Izzy Award for special achievement in independent media, in 2009,[135] and the 2010 Online Journalism Award for Best Commentary for his investigative work on the conditions of Chelsea Manning.[136]

His reporting on the National Security Agency (NSA) won numerous other awards around the world, including top investigative journalism prizes from the George Polk Award for National Security Reporting,[137] the 2013 Online Journalism Awards,[138] the Esso Award for Excellence in Reporting in Brazil for his articles in O Globo on NSA mass surveillance of Brazilians (becoming the first foreigner to win the award),[139] the 2013 Libertad de Expresion Internacional award from Argentinian magazine Perfil,[140] and the 2013 Pioneer Award from the Electronic Frontier Foundation.[141] The team that Greenwald led at The Guardian was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service for their reporting on the NSA.[142] Foreign Policy Magazine then named him one of the top 100 Global Thinkers of 2013.[143]

In 2014 Greenwald received the Geschwister-Scholl-Preis, an annual German literary award, for the German edition of No Place to Hide.[144] Greenwald was also named the 2014 recipient of the McGill Medal for Journalistic Courage from the Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication.[145]

Read more here:
Glenn Greenwald - Wikipedia

Encryption | SANS Security Awareness

What Is Encryption?

You may hear people use the term encryption and how you should use it to protect yourself and your information. However, encryption can be confusing and you should understand its limitations. In this newsletter, we explain in simple terms what encryption is, how it protects you, and how to implement it properly.

You have a tremendous amount of sensitive information on your devices, such as personal documents, pictures, and emails. If you were to have one of your devices lost or stolen, all of your sensitive information could be accessed by whoever possesses it. In addition, you may conduct sensitive transactions online, such as banking or shopping. If anyone were to monitor these activities, they could steal your information, such as your financial account or credit card numbers. Encryption protects you in these situations by helping ensure unauthorized people cannot access or modify your information.

Encryption has been around for thousands of years. Today, encryption is far more sophisticated, but it serves the same purpose -- to pass a secret message from one place to another by ensuring only those authorized to read the message can access it. When information is not encrypted, it is called plain-text. This means anyone can easily read or access it. Encryption converts this information into a non-readable format called cipher-text. Todays encryption works by using complex mathematical operations and a unique key to convert your information into cipher-text. The key is what locks or unlocks your information. In most cases, your key is a password or passcode.

In general, there are two types of data to encrypt: data at rest (such as the data stored on your mobile device) and data in motion (such as retrieving email or messaging a friend).

Encrypting data at rest is vital to protect information in case your computer or mobile device is lost or stolen. Todays devices are extremely powerful and hold a tremendous amount of information, but are also very easy to lose. In addition, other types of mobile media can hold sensitive information, such as USB flash drives or external hard drives. Full Disk Encryption (FDE) is a widely used encryption technique that encrypts the entire drive in your system. This means that everything on the system is automatically encrypted for you; you do not have to decide what or what not to encrypt. Today, most computers come with FDE, but you may have to manually turn it on or enable it. It is called FileVault on Mac computers, while on Windows computers, depending on the version you have, you can use Bitlocker or Device Encryption. Most mobile devices also support FDE. iOS on iPhones and iPads automatically enable FDE once a passcode has been set. Starting with Android 6.0 (Marshmallow), Google is requiring FDE be enabled by default, provided the hardware meets certain minimum standards.

Information is also vulnerable when it is in transit. If the data is not encrypted, it can be monitored, modified, and captured online. This is why you want to ensure that any sensitive online transactions and communications are encrypted. A common type of online encryption is HTTPS. This means all traffic between your browser and a website is encrypted. Look for https:// in the URL, a lock icon on your browser, or your URL bar turning green. Another example is when you send or receive email. Most email clients provide encrypted capabilities, which you may have to enable. A third example of encrypting data in transit is between two users chatting with each other, such as with iMessage, Wickr, Signal, WhatsApp, or Telegram. Apps like these use end-to-end encryption, which prevents third parties from accessing data while its transferred from one end system or device to another. This means only you and the person youre communicating with can read what is sent.

To be sure you are protected when using encryption, it is paramount that you use it correctly:

OUCH! newsletter is under the Creative Commons license. You are free to share / distribute it but may not sell or modify it.

See the original post:
Encryption | SANS Security Awareness