DOCSLIB.ORG

Intelligence Activitifs Senate Resolution 21

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIFS SENATE RESOLUTION 21 HEARINGS BEFORE; THE SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES OP THE UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-FOURTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION VOLUME 4 MAIL OPENING OCTOBER 21, 22, AND 24, 1975 Printed for the use of the Select Committee To Study Governmental Operations With Respect to Intelligence Activities U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 64663 0 WASHINGTON: 1976 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 -Price $2.40 OPERATIONS SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES FRANK CHURCH, Idaho, Chairman JOHN G. TOWER, Texas, Vice Chairman JR., Tennessee PHILIP A. HART, Michl gan HOWARD H. BAKER, Arizona WALTER F. MONDALE , Minnesota BARRY GOLDWATER, MCC. MATHIAS, JR., Maryland WALTER D. HUDDLES!rON, Kentucky CHARLES Pennsylvania ROBERT MORGAN, Nor th Carolina RICHARD SCHWEIKER, GARY HART, Colorado WILLIAM G. MILLER, Staff Director FREDERICK A. 0. SCHWARZ, Jr., Chief Counsel CURTIS R. SMOTHERS, Counsel to the Minority AUDREY HATRY, Clerk of the Committee (II) CONTENTS HEARING DAYS Page Tuesday, October 21, 1975a-- I Wednesday, October 22, 1975 --- 41 Friday, October 24, 1975 - 119 LIST OF WITNESSES '\TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1975 Stewart, Gordon, former Inspector General, Central Intelligence Agency, accompanied by Stanley Gaines, counsel -- 3-----3 Abernathy, Thomas, former staff member, Inspector General's staff, Central Intelligence Agency, accompanied by Mitchell Rogovin, counsel - 3 Glennon, John, former staff member, Inspector General's staff, Central Intelligence Agency - 3 Osborn, Howard J., former Director of Security, Central Intelligence Agency, accompanied by John Debelias, counsel ----- 25 WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1975 Day, Edward J., former Postmaster General, accompanied by James F. Reilly, Sr., counsel - 42 Gronouski, John A., former Postmaster General -------------- 42 Blount, Winton M., former Postmaster General, accompanied by Douglas Arant, counsel --------------------------- 42 Reilly, James, Sr., counsel for J. Edward Day - 68 Montague, Henry, former Chief Inspector,- Postal Inspection Service - 70 Cotter, William, former Chief Inspector, Postal Inspection Service - 70 Helms, Richard, Ambassador to Iran and former Director, Central Intel- ligence Agency -------------------------------------- 83 FRIDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1975 Mitchell, John, former Attorney General, accompanied by William G. Hundley, counsel - 119- ---------------- Wannall, W. Raymond, Assistant Director, Intelligence Division, Federal Bureau of Investigationt---------- D 147 Branigan, William, Section Chief of Counterintelligence, Federal Bureau of Investigation- Ce147 Moore, Donald E., former FBI Inspector---------- 147 Mintz, John A., Assistant Director, Legal Counsel Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation------------- -147 HEARINGS EXHIBITS I No. 1-Inspector General's Survey of the Office of Security ----------- 175 No. 2-November 21, 1955 memorandum to Chief of Operations re Project HTLIN GUAL- to-Chief of ..... 187 No. 3-May 4, 1956 memorandum from James Angleton to Director of C Intelligenceentra re Projectl HTLINGUALe- toDirectorof195- No. 4-June 3, 1971 memorandum for the record re meeting at DCI-s office concerning HTLINGUAL ----------------- 197 ' Under criteria determined by the committee, in consultation with the Central Intel- ligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, certain materials have been deleted from these documents, some of which were previously classified, to maintain the integrity of the internal operating procedures of the agencies involved, and to protect Intelligence sources and methods. Further deletions were made with respect to protecting the privacy of certain individuals and groups. These deletions do not change the material content of these exhibits. (mIII) IV No. 5-August 30, 1971 memorandum to Deputy Chief, Counterintel- ligence re HTLINGUAL-Correspondence of members of the Page U.S. Government -199 December 22, 1971 memorandum for the record re handling of items to and from elected or appointed U.S. officials -200 No. 6-Chart prepared by Senate Select Committee, showing notification of Postmasters General concerning mail openings -202 No. 7-April 23, 1965 memorandum for the files from [CIA officer] re discussion with Assistant Deputy Director for plans concerning HTLINGUAL operation and congressional subcommittee hearings concerning tampering with the mail -203 No. 8-February 16, 1961 memorandum from Richard Helms to Deputy Chief, Counterintelligence re HTLIN GUAL -205 No. 9-May 19, 1971 memorandum for the record re DCI's Meeting Concerning HTLINGUAL -206 No. 10-February 16, 1961 memorandum from Richard Helms to Deputy Chief, Counterintelligence re HTLINGUAL -210 No. 11-Excerpts from June 1970 Special Report of the Interagency Com- _ - 4 mittee on Intelligence (Ad Hoc) [the Huston plan] -211 No. 12-March 20, 1970 letter from Richard Helms to J. Edgar Hoover - 219 No. 13-February 1, 1962 memorandum from Deputy Chief, Counterin- telligence to Director, Office of Security re Project HTLIN GUAL_ 222 No. 14-July 28, 1970 memorandum for the record from Richard Helms re Discussion with Attorney General Mitchell on Domestic Intelligence-224 No. 15-September 18, 1970 memorandum from John Dean to the Attorney General -225 No. 16-March 11, 1960 memorandum from SAC, San Francisco to FBI Headquarters re Confidential Source -228 No. 17-December 5, 1973 SAC memorandum 56-73 -232 No. 18-October 2, 1964 memorandum from D. E. Moore to W. C. Sullivan re Espionage -233 No. 19-February 27, 1965 memorandum from A. H. Belmont to Clyde Tolson re the Long Committee -235 No. 20-March 2, 1965 memorandum from J. Edgar Hoover to Messrs. Tolson, Belmont, Gale, Rosen, Sullivan, DeLoach-238 No. 21-February 20, 1975 memorandum for the record re Operational Aspects of MKSOURDOUGH, San Francisco, Calif- 241 No. 22-March 10, 1961 memorandum from D. E. Moore to A. H. Belmont re Project Hunter, Espionage R -244 No. 23-August 24, 1966 from M. E. Triplett to W. A. Branigan -245 No. 24-May 25, 1965 Airtel from SAC, San Francisco to FBI Head- quarters -2-4-9---------------------------------------- - 249 No. 25-May 24, 1975 Decision in Lamont v. Postmaster General of the United States -250 No. 26-January 18, 1966 memorandum from FBI Headquarters to SAC, San Francisco re Confidential Source-256 No. 27-May 17, 1954 memorandum to Director of Security from Richard Helms re SRPOINTER -257 APPENDIX October 24, 1975 letter from J. Edward Day to the Senate Select Com- mittee -259----- - INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES-MAIL OPENING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1975 U.S. SENATE, SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITI RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE AcTIvinIEs, Wa8hington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room 318, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Frank Church (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Church, Tower, Huddleston, Morgan, Hart of Colorado, Goldwater, and Schweiker. Also present: William G. Miller, staff director; Frederick A. Schwarz, 0. Jr., chief counsel; and Curtis R. Smothers, counsel to the minority. The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will please come to order. Today, and through the rest of this week, we wish to resume our in- quiry into the question of why the Federal Government has been open- ing the mail of American citizens for over two decades. It is a policy fundamentally at odds with freedom of expression and contrary to the laws of the land. This committee has already reviewed in public some details of the CIA mail openings while we were considering the Huston plan. One provision of that plan was a recommendation to institute a mail opening program, though, ironically, intelligence officers were already busily unsealing envelopes in various parts of the country and had been doing so for years. We are less concerned this week with the emphasis of the mail grams pro- than with the workings of the institutions that allowed them to take root and flourish, even though they violated the laws of the land. How did this mail policy begin? Who in the CIA, the FBI, the White House, the Justice Department, and the Post Office knew about it? What reviews were made of the policies as the leadership changed with- in these institutions? Though mail is the subject of this week's hearings, what interests ius most are the reasons the Agency used to justify this violation of civil liberties. The question of mail openings, then, will be only the medium through which we probe in depth the way our intelligence services function. As a case study, mail opening reveals the most revealing look of the inner life of the CIA and the FBI. In the instance of the CIA, with which we begin our examination today, the evidence suggests their mail program was allowed to continue despite the harshest criti- cism of it from investigators within the CIA Inspector General's (1) 2 Office, and despite the fact that it was not very productive in terms of intelligence information. Moreover, throughout the 20-year period, many senior Govern- ment officials were not told of the mail openings or were misinformed about them. These are serious charges which have arisen in our re- search into the mail opening program of the CIA and the FBI. We are here today to explore the decisionmaking process within the CIA, to ascertain how valid these public allegations are. To assist us in our search for understanding and for ways to im- prove the Government, we have appearing before the committee this morning Mr. Gordon Stewart, Mr. John Glennon, and Mr. Thomas Abernathy, all of whom served in the CIA Inspector General's Office, which investigated mail opening programs in the sixties, and Howard Osborn, who will appear after these three gentlemen, who was the CIA Director of the Office of Security from 1964 to 1974. Before I swear the witnesses, I would like to ask Senator Tower for opening remarks that he would like to make at this time. Senator TOWER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me begin with an endorsement of the chairman's statement that the primary value of these open sessions on mail opening is the opportunity to gain the insights which can only come from an in- depth case study.
Recommended publications
  • Index to the Oral History of Rear Admiral Albert G

    Index to the Oral History of Rear Admiral Albert G

    Index to the Oral History of Rear Admiral Albert G. Mumma, U.S. Navy (Retired) Accidents In the late 1920s Lieutenant Richard Whitehead crashed an O2U on the deck of the aircraft carrier Saratoga (CV-3) when his tailhook caught the barrier wire, 28-29 Aircraft Carriers The effort in the 1950s and 1960s to justify nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, 190-191, 268-269; rejection in the late 1950s of a congressional effort to build an aircraft carrier in a West Coast shipyard, 200-202 Air Warfare The German Air Force used the ME 163 rocket-powered airplane against the Allies in World War II, 107, 116 Albacore, USS (AGSS-569) Experimental test vehicle used in the early 1950s to demonstrate the feasibility of the teardrop-shaped hull as the best hydrodynamic form for a true submarine, 150-151, 172 Alcohol In 1945, in Bremen, Germany, Mumma had to disarm an Army photographer who had gotten drunk and was brandishing a pistol, 111-112 Alsos Mission At the end of World War II, U.S. officers visited France and Germany to ascertain German technical developments during the war, 97, 101-105 See also: Naval Technical Mission Europe American Society of Naval Engineers (ASNE) Professional society that contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field, 234-236 Andrea Doria (Passenger Liner) Italian ship that sank in July 1956 off Nantucket after colliding with the Swedish liner Stockholm, 222-224; a longitudinal bulkhead was probably a factor in the sinking, 223-224 Antisubmarine Warfare German U-boats were surprised during World War II by the effectiveness of American airborne radar, 117 1 Arkansas, USS (BB-33) Battleship that in the summer of 1923 made a midshipman training cruise to Europe, 7-9 Army, U.S.
  • John Mccone and the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

    John Mccone and the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

    C061B5413 Approved for Release: 2014/09/29 C06185413 •' •' , S&GRIH'!JNOFORN Death of a President (U) DCI John McCone and the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy David Robarge (U) In recognition ofthe .50th anniversary ofthe assassination ofPresident John F. Kennedy on 22 November 1963, Studies in Intelligence reprints the below, which originally appeared as a chajJter in ChiefHistorian Da\tld Robarge:S bookJohn McCone as Director ofCentral Intelligence, 1961-1?65, published by the Center for the Study ofIntelligence in 200.5. (U) Misconceptions abound regarding CIA~ connection to the assas· sination and its role in subsequent investigations, contributing to the foct that, according to a recent polltalrm by the History Chan· (U) Walter Elder dashed nel, 71 percent ofthe American public still believes that Kennedy's in and cried'' out, 'The del:lth reniltedfrom a conspiracy. president's been shot/' ·(U) Robarge tells a very different story about Cl.A!! immediDte response to the assassination, ils interaction wilh the FBI and War­ ren Commission, the surprise appearance ofKGB defector Htri Nosenko with troubling information about Lee Harvey Oswald, and DC/ McCone's involvement with later inquiries about Kennedy's '' murder. Nothing in tlie numerous books and articles about the ass~sination that have appeared since the publication ofMcCone has materially changed any ofRobarge~ conclusions. (S) Jolut McCone and Lyman K.irk7 leaving, over hu1th, wanted to talk patrick, the Agency's Executive about the PFIAB meeting with his Director-Comptroller, met with Presi· senior deputies. They were eating in dent's Foreign Intelligence Advisory the French Room, a smaJI space next Boanl (PFIAB) through the morning .to the director•s office, when of22 November 1963.
  • Directors of Central Intelligence As Leaders of the U.S

    Directors of Central Intelligence As Leaders of the U.S

    All statements of fact, opinion, or analysis expressed in this book are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect official positions of the Central Intel- ligence Agency or any other US government entity, past or present. Nothing in the contents should be construed as asserting or implying US government endorsement of the authors’ factual statements and interpretations. The Center for the Study of Intelligence The Center for the Study of Intelligence (CSI) was founded in 1974 in response to Director of Central Intelligence James Schlesinger’s desire to create within CIA an organization that could “think through the functions of intelligence and bring the best intellects available to bear on intelli- gence problems.” The Center, comprising professional historians and experienced practitioners, attempts to document lessons learned from past operations, explore the needs and expectations of intelligence consumers, and stimulate serious debate on current and future intelligence challenges. To support these activities, CSI publishes Studies in Intelligence and books and monographs addressing historical, operational, doctrinal, and theoretical aspects of the intelligence profession. It also administers the CIA Museum and maintains the Agency’s Historical Intelligence Collection. Comments and questions may be addressed to: Center for the Study of Intelligence Central Intelligence Agency Washington, DC 20505 Printed copies of this book are available to requesters outside the US government from: Government Printing Office (GPO) Superintendent of Documents P.O. Box 391954 Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954 Phone: (202) 512-1800 E-mail: [email protected] ISBN: 1-929667-14-0 The covers: The portraits on the front and back covers are of the 19 directors of central intelligence, beginning with the first, RAdm.
  • A List of the Records That Petitioners Seek Is Attached to the Petition, Filed Concurrently Herewith

    A List of the Records That Petitioners Seek Is Attached to the Petition, Filed Concurrently Herewith

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN RE PETITION OF STANLEY KUTLER, ) AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION, ) AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR LEGAL HISTORY, ) Miscellaneous Action No. ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN HISTORIANS, ) and SOCIETY OF AMERICAN ARCHIVISTS. ) ) MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR ORDER DIRECTING RELEASE OF TRANSCRIPT OF RICHARD M. NIXON’S GRAND JURY TESTIMONY OF JUNE 23-24, 1975, AND ASSOCIATED MATERIALS OF THE WATERGATE SPECIAL PROSECUTION FORCE Professor Stanley Kutler, the American Historical Association, the American Society for Legal History, the Organization of American Historians, and the Society of American Archivists petition this Court for an order directing the release of President Richard M. Nixon’s thirty-five-year- old grand jury testimony and associated materials of the Watergate Special Prosecution Force.1 On June 23-24, 1975, President Nixon testified before two members of a federal grand jury who had traveled from Washington, DC, to San Clemente, California. The testimony was then presented in Washington, DC, to the full grand jury that had been convened to investigate political espionage, illegal campaign contributions, and other wrongdoing falling under the umbrella term Watergate. Watergate was the defining event of Richard Nixon’s presidency. In the early 1970s, as the Vietnam War raged and the civil rights movement in the United States continued its momentum, the Watergate scandal ignited a crisis of confidence in government leadership and a constitutional crisis that tested the limits of executive power and the mettle of the democratic process. “Watergate” was 1A list of the records that petitioners seek is attached to the Petition, filed concurrently herewith.
  • A Plausibly Deniable Encryption Scheme for Personal Data Storage Andrew Brockmann Harvey Mudd College

    A Plausibly Deniable Encryption Scheme for Personal Data Storage Andrew Brockmann Harvey Mudd College

    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont HMC Senior Theses HMC Student Scholarship 2015 A Plausibly Deniable Encryption Scheme for Personal Data Storage Andrew Brockmann Harvey Mudd College Recommended Citation Brockmann, Andrew, "A Plausibly Deniable Encryption Scheme for Personal Data Storage" (2015). HMC Senior Theses. 88. https://scholarship.claremont.edu/hmc_theses/88 This Open Access Senior Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the HMC Student Scholarship at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in HMC Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Plausibly Deniable Encryption Scheme for Personal Data Storage Andrew Brockmann Talithia D. Williams, Advisor Arthur T. Benjamin, Reader Department of Mathematics May, 2015 Copyright © 2015 Andrew Brockmann. The author grants Harvey Mudd College and the Claremont Colleges Library the nonexclusive right to make this work available for noncommercial, educational pur- poses, provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the author. Abstract Even if an encryption algorithm is mathematically strong, humans in- evitably make for a weak link in most security protocols. A sufficiently threatening adversary will typically be able to force people to reveal their encrypted data. Methods of deniable encryption seek to mend this vulnerability by al- lowing for decryption to alternate data which is plausible but not sensitive. Existing schemes which allow for deniable encryption are best suited for use by parties who wish to communicate with one another.
  • Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear War. Papers Based on a Symposium Of

    Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear War. Papers Based on a Symposium Of

    . DOCUMENT RESUME ED 233 910 SE 043 147 A AUTHOR Mo'irison, Philip; And Others TITLE Nuclear Weapcins and'Nuclear War. Papers Based on a.' symposium of the Forum on Physics and Society of the American Physical Society, (ashington, D.C., April 1982.). INSTITUTION Americ'ap Association of Physics Teachers, Washington, 'D.C. 0 PUB DATE 83 NOTE 44. L AVAILABLE FROM American AssoCiatiOn of Physics Teachers, Graduate Phygics Bldg., SUNY, Stony Btook, NY,11794._(Nuclear Weapons $2.00 U.S., prepaid; Nuclear Energy $2.50 U.S./$3.00 outside U.S.). PUB TYPE Reports - General (140) Speeches/Conference Papers (150.) EDRS PRICE MF01 Plus Postage. PC Not Available from EDRS. DESCRIPTORS Armed Forces; *Disarmament; *Intetnational Relations; National Defense; Nuclear Technology; *Nuclear Warfare; Treaties; *World Problems IDENTIFIERS *Nuclear Weapons; *USSR ABSTRACT Three papers on nuclear weapons and nuclear war, baged on talks 'given by distinguihed physicists during an American Physical Society-sponsored symposium,,-are provided in this booklet. They include "Caught Between Asymptotes" (Philip Morrison), "We are not Inferior to the Soviets" (Hans A. Bethe), and "MAD vs. NUTS" (Wolfgang K. H.. Panofsky).'Areas addressed in the first paper (whose title is based on a metaphOr offered by, John von Neumann) include the threat of nuclear war, WorldWar III. versus World War II, and .others. The major point of the second paper is that United States strategic nuclear forces are not infeiior to those of the Soviets., Areas addressed include accuracy/vulnerability, new weapons, madness of .nuclear war, SALT I and II, proposed nuclear weapons freeze, and possible U.S initiatives'.
  • Trump's Generals

    Trump's Generals

    STRATEGIC STUDIES QUARTERLY - PERSPECTIVE Trump’s Generals: A Natural Experiment in Civil-Military Relations JAMES JOYNER Abstract President Donald Trump’s filling of numerous top policy positions with active and retired officers he called “my generals” generated fears of mili- tarization of foreign policy, loss of civilian control of the military, and politicization of the military—yet also hope that they might restrain his worst impulses. Because the generals were all gone by the halfway mark of his administration, we have a natural experiment that allows us to com- pare a Trump presidency with and without retired generals serving as “adults in the room.” None of the dire predictions turned out to be quite true. While Trump repeatedly flirted with civil- military crises, they were not significantly amplified or deterred by the presence of retired generals in key roles. Further, the pattern continued in the second half of the ad- ministration when “true” civilians filled these billets. Whether longer-term damage was done, however, remains unresolved. ***** he presidency of Donald Trump served as a natural experiment, testing many of the long- debated precepts of the civil-military relations (CMR) literature. His postelection interviewing of Tmore than a half dozen recently retired four- star officers for senior posts in his administration unleashed a torrent of columns pointing to the dangers of further militarization of US foreign policy and damage to the military as a nonpartisan institution. At the same time, many argued that these men were uniquely qualified to rein in Trump’s worst pro- clivities. With Trump’s tenure over, we can begin to evaluate these claims.
  • Military Law Review

    Military Law Review

    U.S. Volume 223 Issue 1 2015 DEP’T OF ARMY PAMPHLET 27-100-223 PAMPHLET ARMY OF DEP’T MILITARY LAW REVIEW ARTICLES THE FRENCH MILITARY INTERVENTION IN MALI, COUNTER-TERRORISM, AND THE LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT Mr. Dan E. Stigall MILITARY LAW REVIEW LAW MILITARY THE ABUSE OF DISCRETION STANDARD OF REVIEW IN MILITARY JUSTICE APPEALS Colonel Jeremy Stone Weber HE DID IT, BUT SO WHAT? WHY PERMITTING NULLIFICATION AT COURT-MARTIAL RIGHTFULLY ALLOWS MEMBERS TO USE THEIR CONSCIENCES IN DELIBERATIONS Major Michael E. Korte CYBERTERRORISTS: THE IDENTIFICATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF NON-STATE ACTORS WHO ENGAGE IN CYBER-HOSTILITIES Major Andrea C. Goode KEEP YOUR HANDS TO YOURSELF: WHY THE MAXIMUM PENALTY FOR ASSAULT CONSUMMATED BY A BATTERY MUST BE INCREASED Major Brian J. Kargus Book Review VOLUME 223 2015 Department of the Army Pamphlet 27-100-223 Military Law Review Volume 223 Issue 1 2015 CONTENTS Articles The French Military Intervention in Mali, Counter-terrorism, and the Law of Armed Conflict Mr. Dan E. Stigall 1 The Abuse of Discretion Standard of Review in Military Justice Appeals Colonel Jeremy Stone Weber 41 He Did It, but So What? Why Permitting Nullification at Court-Martial Rightfully Allows Members to Use Their Consciences in Deliberations Major Michael E. Korte 100 Cyberterrorists: The Identification and Classification of Non-State Actors who Engage in Cyber-hostilities Major Andrea C. Goode 157 Keep your Hands to Yourself: Why the Maximum Penalty for Assault Consummated by a Battery Must Be Increased Major Brian J. Kargus 198 Book Review Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War Reviewed by Captain Sean P.
  • Mobihydra: Pragmatic and Multi-Level Plausibly Deniable Encryption Storage for Mobile Devices?

    Mobihydra: Pragmatic and Multi-Level Plausibly Deniable Encryption Storage for Mobile Devices?

    MobiHydra: Pragmatic and Multi-Level Plausibly Deniable Encryption Storage for Mobile Devices? Xingjie Yuy;z;\, Bo Chen], Zhan Wangy;z;??, Bing Changy;z;\, Wen Tao Zhuz;y, and Jiwu Jingy;z y State Key Laboratory of Information Security, Institute of Information Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, CHINA z Data Assurance and Communication Security Research Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, CHINA \ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, CHINA ] Department of Computer Science, Stony Brook University, USA Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract. Nowadays, smartphones have started being used as a tool to collect and spread po- litically sensitive or activism information. The exposure of the possession of such sensitive data shall pose a risk in severely threatening the life safety of the device owner. For instance, the data owner may be caught and coerced to give away the encryption keys so that the encryption alone is inadequate to mitigate such risk. In this work, we present MobiHydra, a pragmatic plausibly deniable encryption (PDE) scheme featuring multi-level deniability on mobile devices, to circumvent the coercive attack. MobiHydra is pragmatic in that it remarkably supports hiding opportunistic data without necessarily rebooting the device. In addition, MobiHydra favourably mitigates the so-called booting-time defect, which is a whistle-blower to expose the usage of PDE in previous solutions. We implement a prototype for MobiHydra on Google Nexus S. The evaluation results demonstrate that MobiHydra introduces very low overhead compared with other PDE solutions for mobile devices.
  • Was the CIA Involved in the Assassination of President Kennedy Or the Cover up Conspiracy?

    Was the CIA Involved in the Assassination of President Kennedy Or the Cover up Conspiracy?

    Was the CIA Involved in the Assassination of President Kennedy or the Cover Up Conspiracy? Introduction: For more than ten years there has been much speculation about whether the Central Intelligence Agency played a role in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. With the Watergate revelations, the testimony of such well known CIA types as Richard Helms, E. Howard Hunt, and James McCord, and with many questions about the CIA's role in the Watergate episode still unanswered, it seems pertinent to once again raise the questions in the title. Was the CIA involved in some way in the conspiracy to assassinate John Kennedy, and was the agency involved in the second conspiracy to cover up the first? Various assassination researchers and writers have, through the ten years, shown substantial evidence that CIA front organizations and former CIA agents were involved in the first conspiracy and that the CIA itself was deeply involved in the cover up conspiracy. (1)(2)(3)(4) Recent revelations and.new evidence has appeared that make the questions worth further exploration. 2 E. Howard Hunt and Mexico City: The most recent revelations concern that compulsive spy, Everette Howard Hunt. Tad Szulc (5) has informed us that Hunt was CIA acting station chief in Mexico City during August and September, 1963. Because of a hole in the known whereabouts of Hunt, as documented by Szulc, we can draw the conclusion that he was still acting station chief in October and November 1963. To the uninitiated this may seem disconnected from the JFK assassina- tion. However, to the researchers who have had access to the statements made by CIA agents Harry Dean, Richard Case Nagell and to FBI reports about CIA agents Ronald Augustinovich and Mary Hope, Hunt's position in Mexico City is very significant.
  • Armies and Influence: Public Deference to Foreign Policy Elites

    Armies and Influence: Public Deference to Foreign Policy Elites

    Armies and Influence: Public Deference to Foreign Policy Elites Tyler Jost⇤ and Joshua D. Kertzer† Last modified: January 20, 2021 Abstract: When is the public more likely to defer to elites on foreign policy? Existing research suggests the public takes its cues from co-partisans, but what happens when co-partisans disagree? Drawing on research on the social origins of trust, we argue that the public prioritizes information from elites who signal expertise through prior experience. However, di↵ering social standing of government institutions means the public values some types of experience more than others, even when the experience lies outside the policy domain of the cue. Using a conjoint experiment, we show that the American public defers to cue-givers with experience — but that it is especially deferential towards military experience, even on non-military issues. We replicate our findings in a second conjoint experiment showing that the same dynamics hold when considering partisan candidates for cabinet positions. The results have important implications for the study of public opinion, bureaucratic politics, and civil-military relations. ⇤Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Brown University. Email: tyler [email protected]: http://www.tylerjost.com †Professor of Government, Department of Government, Harvard University. 1737 Cambridge St, Cambridge MA 02138. Email: [email protected]:http://people.fas.harvard.edu/˜jkertzer/ In January 2017, three nominees for senior positions in the Trump administration — James Mattis, Rex Tillerson, and Mike Pompeo — publicly testified before Congress. On issues ranging from the Iran deal, to the ban on immigrants from a set of Muslim-majority countries, to US defense policy toward Russia, the nominees o↵ered policy assessments and recommendations that not only di↵ered from President Trump, but also from one another.1 Long after these confirmation hearings ended, commentators continue to note that the Trump cabinet has been filled with an array of dissenting voices.
  • The Spectacle of the False-Flag

    The Spectacle of the False-Flag

    The Spectacle of the False-Flag THE SPECTACLE OF THE FALSE-FLAG: PARAPOLITICS FROM JFK TO WATERGATE Eric Wilson THE SPECTACLE OF THE FALSE-FLAG: PARAPOLITICS from JFK to WATERGATE Eric Wilson, Monash University 2015 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This work is Open Access, which means that you are free to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work as long as you clearly attribute the work to the author, that you do not use this work for commercial gain in any form whatsoever, and that you in no way, alter, transform, or build upon the work outside of its normal use in academic scholarship without express permission of the author and the publisher of this volume. For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. First published in 2015 by Thought | Crimes an imprint of punctumbooks.com ISBN-13: 978-0988234055 ISBN-10: 098823405X and the full book is available for download via our Open Monograph Press website (a Public Knowledge Project) at: www.thoughtcrimespress.org a project of the Critical Criminology Working Group, publishers of the Open Access Journal: Radical Criminology: journal.radicalcriminology.org Contact: Jeff Shantz (Editor), Dept. of Criminology, KPU 12666 72 Ave. Surrey, BC V3W 2M8 [ + design & open format publishing: pj lilley ] I dedicate this book to my Mother, who watched over me as I slept through the spectacle in Dallas on November 22, 1963 and who was there to celebrate my birthday with me during the spectacle at the Watergate Hotel on June 17, 1972 Contents Editor©s Preface ................................................................