Stuxnet Leaks Came From Administration Itself

from the I-am-Jack's-utter-lack-of-surprise dept

It was pointed out towards the end of June that the Justice Department was investigating the “leaks” that led to David E. Sanger’s book on the Stuxnet virus, along with a widely-read New York Times article that preceded it. At that time, indications were given that the target of the investigations was the former second-highest ranking member of the military, General James Cartwright.

Mike pointed out then that it would be interesting to see how Cartwright was treated for his leaks as compared to Bradley Manning. It looks like there will be plenty of “interesting” comparisons to be made in the near future, as a Washington Times article by Rowan Scarborough has discovered (with the help of documents acquired by Freedom Watch) that the trail of Stuxnet leaks leads directly back to the White House itself.

The Obama administration provided a New York Times reporter exclusive access to a range of high-level national security officials for a book that divulged highly classified information on a U.S. cyberwar on Iran’s nuclear program, internal State Department emails show.

The information in the 2012 book by chief Washington correspondent David E. Sanger has been the subject of a yearlong Justice Department criminal investigation: The FBI is hunting for those who leaked details to Mr. Sanger about a U.S.-Israeli covert cyberoperation to infect Iran’s nuclear facilities with a debilitating computer worm known as Stuxnet.

The theory that the administration is very amenable to leaks that make the administration look good is again confirmed here.

The scores of State Department emails from the fall of 2011 to the spring of 2012 do not reveal which officials told Mr. Sanger, but they do show an atmosphere of cooperation within the administration for a book generally favorable toward, but not uncritical of, President Obama.

While many writers have been granted insider access to the White House over the years, rarely does their level of access trigger an investigation, as Sanger’s did. General Cartwright was “targeted,” but conveniently avoided any further action (at least to this point) from the Justice Department by retiring. Thomas Donlion, then National Security Advisor, was called out as being the “hero” and “commenter of record” in Thomas Ricks’ review of Sanger’s book. Good call by Ricks. Donlion resigned in June and left his post in July.

The Times article also details accusations made by Republican critics that the administration had broken laws by divulging classified information to Sanger. More damning were the accusations that these leaks were done solely to pump up Obama’s reputation during the 2012 election run.

The evidence released so far paints a pretty damning portrait of an administration prone to convenient transparency. Whistleblowing and leaks are fine as long as the administration approves of the message. What will be telling is how these leakers are punished for coughing up classified information directly related to national security.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Stuxnet Leaks Came From Administration Itself”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

Will Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook now come out and denounce the surveillance?

They need to rescue their position, and their complicity in this will damage their business. They need to realize this isn’t going away and they’d better choose the constitutional side because the lying toerags are not winning.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Well sometimes they don’t just punish people.

If you directly contradict their orders and oh, I don’t know, release information on how Tony Blair had info on Iraq completely pulled out of his ass, then they cut your wrists, let you bleed to death and then dump your corpse in a field (all on Blair’s direct order of course).

One day David Kelly will get a REAL inquest that wasn’t controlled behind the scenes by whitehall trying desperately to cover up a vicious, evil crime against ANOTHER whistleblower.

Jerrymiah (profile) says:

Stuxnet Leak

This shows that the Obama Administration has absolutely no regards for National Security and will use the term National Security to prosecute anybody that attempts to safeguard the constitution. On this point Obama should be the subject of IMPEACHMENT and most members of his administration including the DOJ investigated and charged with leaking top secret information. Most members of his cabinet should be subject to recall. Keith Alexander, Michael Hayden and James clapper should be charged with ‘Attempting to foment a Coup d’Etat. The military Establishment has to be put back in its proper place and the running of the government must be returned to civilian authorities.

Pragmatic says:

Re: Stuxnet Leak

House Speaker John Boehner issued a slightly less inflammatory statement arguing that the President must not back down on keeping the program intact, despite the fact that (again) there is no evidence that it has been necessary in stopping a single terrorist attack.

“Transparency is important, but we expect the White House to insist that no reform will compromise the operational integrity of the program. That must be the president?s red line, and he must enforce it. Our priority should continue to be saving American lives, not saving face.”

Short version: if you try to pull Obama down you’ll take most of the Republican Congresscritters with him. Is that what you want?

Not that I’d object.

Mudlock says:

Bad analogy time:

Trespassing is illegal. But when I let you on my property, it’s not trespassing.

Leaking state secrets is illegal. But when the White House gives you security access, it’s not leaking.

The problem I see here is that the White House wanted Stuxnet to look like–and be treated in the media like–a leak, when it wasn’t actually a leak. But it’s not a leak, so no, it won’t actually be prosecuted as a leak. (Duh.) It is however certainly deplorable and speaks to some hypocrisy from the White House with respect to how they treat actual leakers, and certainly reflects poorly on the media for playing along, and more so, for they were playing along AGAINST US.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Cyber Pearl Harbour

I’d say that making a move to take away a major weapon of a main enemy would be good thing, at least in the eyes of a lot of people. But nobody in this collection of morons understands the law of unintended consequences. Bet they’ll be surprised when Stuxnet mutates and comes back to bite them in the ass.

You could argue several sides about doing this to Iran; but then BRAGGING about it, just screams criminal stupidity.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...