Garda Ombudsman offices bugged

Phoebas · 10-02-2014 09:41PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Two phrases new to me have entered the language. Government level technology and electronic anomoly.

Both sound impressive but neither have been explained.

The 'Government level technology' phrase was from an unidentified source and the 'anomaly' bit from the GSOC seems to downplay the seriousness of the whole thing.

The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission said three technical and electronic “anomalies” were found during an investigation into its
building in September last year.
GSOC said the anomalies could not be explained but the organisation is “satisfied that its databases were not compromised”

Its odd that they make the point that their databases weren't compromised when the integrity of their databases wasn't really in question, but the integrity of their WiFi network and their phone system was, but that wasn't mentioned.

EireGun · 10-02-2014 09:44PM

MadYaker wrote: »

"Government level technology" is a meaningless phrase. Id love to know the source of the information I have highlighted.

I won't hold my breath though....

The government don't really have a motive do they? Corrupt Gardai on the other hand....

I never said whodunnit, because I don't know.

According to John Mooney, Sunday Times (decent crime journalist), who broke the story, said that a fake 3G mobile phone network had been created to harvest mobile phone calls. To create a fake cell tower (called "spoofing") could only be done using tech that costs around €500k, generally not available to anyone other than military or le. The NSA and GCHQ use this tech all the time, not individual "hackers". Anyway, what motive would "hackers" have to target the GSOC, surely the Special Branch or G2 would be a far more tantalising prospect for "hackers", criminal or terrorist organisations?

tomwaterford · 10-02-2014 09:46PM

MadYaker wrote: »

"Government level technology" is a meaningless phrase. Id love to know the source of the information I have highlighted.

I won't hold my breath though....

The government don't really have a motive do they? Corrupt Gardai on the other hand....

emm possibly like identifying potential whistleblowers

Phoebas wrote: »

The 'Government level technology' phrase was from an unidentified source and the 'anomaly' bit from the GSOC seems to downplay the seriousness of the whole thing.

Its odd that they make the point that their databases weren't compromised when the integrity of their databases wasn't really in question, but the integrity of their WiFi network and their phone system was, but that wasn't mentioned.

Almost as if trying to play down political damage...and side-stepping the whole bugging of the conference room issue

EireGun · 10-02-2014 09:47PM

mikom wrote: »

Then........

€500,000, Pfttt, common or garden hacking...........

Are you versed in GSM cell tower spoofing? It's not common/garden hacking, anything but.

mikom · 10-02-2014 09:48PM

EireGun wrote: »

Are you versed in GSM cell tower spoofing? It's not common/garden hacking, anything but.

I agree.

tayto lover · 10-02-2014 09:48PM

MadYaker wrote: »

"Government level technology" is a meaningless phrase. Id love to know the source of the information I have highlighted.

I won't hold my breath though....

The government don't really have a motive do they? Corrupt Gardai on the other hand....

There may be a lot of things concerning Govt Ministers going on that we don't know about. We can never be sure.
As regards corrupt Gardai I would wonder where a Garda or two who are under investigation get their hands on this kind of equipment and the means and opportunity to plant it. It just does not make sense.
If it is true then its someone far higher in authority than a Garda.
We were told that the Ombudsman was concerned about private information coming out mysteriously in the public domain so a big newspaper could easily be involved. First with the news and all that.

Shady Tady · 10-02-2014 09:50PM

EireGun wrote: »

Why does everyone keep suggesting this was carried out by an individual within GSOC, a bunch of corrupt Gardai or a "hacker"? The reports clearly states that "government-level technology" was used, and suggests that the hacking was done from the outside in rather than bugs being physically planted.

On radio this morning, John Mooney from the Sunday Times, who broke the story, said that a fake 3G network was established surrounding the building so that mobile phones could be listen in on. The equipment used to carry that out is not commercially available, its produced by defence companies with permits to sell to governments, police and military only. It can cost upwards of €500,000. Individuals my arse.

Has to be the yanks! Maybe somebody made a complaint about the alleged rendition flights into Shannon and garda inaction. They would plant one for less!

Phoebas · 10-02-2014 09:51PM

EireGun wrote: »

I never said whodunnit, because I don't know.

According to John Mooney, Sunday Times (decent crime journalist), who broke the story, said that a fake 3G mobile phone network had been created to harvest mobile phone calls. To create a fake cell tower (called "spoofing") could only be done using tech that costs around €500k, generally not available to anyone other than military or le. The NSA and GCHQ use this tech all the time, not individual "hackers". Anyway, what motive would "hackers" have to target the GSOC, surely the Special Branch or G2 would be a far more tantalising prospect for "hackers", criminal or terrorist organisations?

Yeah, but we don't know who his source was or if he's verified the story in any way whatsoever.
The GSOC themselves are describing this as 'anomalies' which doesn't sound like 500k worth of equipment generally only in the hands of governments.

Shady Tady · 10-02-2014 09:53PM

Phoebas wrote: »

Yeah, but we don't know who his source was or if he's verified the story in any way whatsoever.
The GSOC themselves are describing this as 'anomalies' which doesn't sound like 500k worth of equipment generally only in the hands of governments.

That could be a loose wire!

EireGun · 10-02-2014 09:55PM

Phoebas wrote: »

Yeah, but we don't know who his source was or if he's verified the story in any way whatsoever.
The GSOC themselves are describing this as 'anomalies' which doesn't sound like 500k worth of equipment generally only in the hands of governments.

True that. But it was the Sunday Times who broke the story and so far their report stands up to scrutiny. They must surely have a source in the GSOC. There's more on this story to come next Sunday apparently...

tomwaterford · 10-02-2014 09:55PM

Phoebas wrote: »

Yeah, but we don't know who his source was or if he's verified the story in any way whatsoever.
The GSOC themselves are describing this as 'anomalies' which doesn't sound like 500k worth of equipment generally only in the hands of governments.

there playing it down after meeting the government IMO!!!
which just makes this more and more curious

this is not readily available technology I think - someone better up on this than me can tell

EireGun · 10-02-2014 09:59PM

tomwaterford wrote: »

there playing it down after meeting the government IMO!!!
which just makes this more and more curious

this is not readily available technology I think - someone better up on this than me can tell

If what John Mooney in the Sunday Times states is correct, then that's absolutely right. Remotely hacking wi-fi systems to gain access to internet activity, reports, etc. remotely hacking a conference phone from a location in the UK and GSM cell tower spoofing has all the hallmarks of a state agency (example being the Garda Crime & Secutiy Branch or G2 Directorate of Intel.). Not saying it was them, but only a government agency could carry out the above. You are talking about dozens of people to carry this out too. Big operation in a small country like Ireland.

knird evol · 10-02-2014 10:02PM

Phoebas wrote: »

The 'Government level technology' phrase was from an unidentified source

I think the phrase originates from the journalist who came out with the story. I was listening to him on the rte radio news when asked what exactly it meant. He paused and seemed a bit miffed by the question then said 'Let's just say I'm satisfied that it is..." To be fair he added that he had a lot of experience in the field and had I think had written a book. But nevertheless the "satisfaction" of a journalist aside I have to wonder is there any software or hardware or knowledge in this day and age that is exclusive to governments?

However if the technology and application is expensive then it does narrow the field. I would say to an individual or group within the Gardai, a criminal group or a staged attack by GSOC. With the first being by far the most likely.

Phoebas · 10-02-2014 10:02PM

tomwaterford wrote: »

this is not readily available technology I think - someone better up on this than me can tell

The only explanation that we have is that there were anomalies - they are very readily available.

The rest is in the realms of unidentified sources and speculation.

Phoebas · 10-02-2014 10:08PM

knird evol wrote: »

I think the phrase originates from the journalist who came out with the story. I was listening to him on the rte radio news when asked what exactly it meant. He paused and seemed a bit miffed by the question then said 'Let's just say I'm satisfied that it is..." To be fair he added that he had a lot of experience in the field and had I think had written a book. But nevertheless the "satisfaction" of a journalist aside I have to wonder is there any software or hardware or knowledge in this day and age that is exclusive to governments?

However if the technology and application is expensive then it does narrow the field. I would say to an individual or group within the Gardai, a criminal group or a staged attack by GSOC. With the first being by far the most likely.

A 'satisfied' journalist doesn't quite sway it for me. I don't doubt his own credentials but I'd like some reasoning for his satisfaction.

Red Pepper · 10-02-2014 10:15PM

I knew the Gardaí has become a law unto themselves but they really have crossed the line now. That commissioner is completely untrustworthy in my opinion.

MadYaker · 10-02-2014 10:16PM

Has the journalist who broke the story read the report issued by the UK security firm who GSOC hired? Did he state that the equipment used would be beyond the reach of any normal member of the Gardai or anyone apart from a government agency?

I would just like to know where you're drawing the conclusion that the sort of equipment used would cost in the region of €500,000 and would only be available to gov agencies because from all the info I can find I'm not coming to the same conclusion. Mostly because as far as I can see the government don't really have a reason to want to spy on the ombudsman.

If there is high level corruption in the Gardai then there are probably a few who are making a lot of money.

EireGun · 10-02-2014 10:18PM

Garda Commissioner Statement - 10th February 2014

Speaking this evening at Garda HQ, Garda Commissioner Martin
Callinan commented.

"I have read very carefully the contents of the Garda Síochána
Ombudsman Commission's statement this evening and note in
particular the assertion that there was no evidence of Garda
misconduct.

It is a cause of grave concern that the Garda Síochána Ombudsman
Commission's statement contains a clear indication that An Garda
Síochána was in some way suspected of complicity in this matter
despite GSOC's overall finding that the existence of technical
and electronic anomalies could not be conclusively explained.

I am now seeking clarification from the Garda Síochána Ombudsman
Commission in respect of the following issues resulting from its
statement.

-The nature and extent of the anomalies identified by the UK
security consultancy?
-Do these anomalies amount to a security breach and is a criminal
offence suspected?
-The basis for the suspicion of Garda misconduct?
-Whether any matters identified now require investigation by An
Garda Síochána?

http://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/garda-commissioner-statement.pdf

knird evol · 10-02-2014 10:19PM

Phoebas wrote: »

A 'satisfied' journalist doesn't quite sway it for me. I don't doubt his own credentials but I'd like some reasoning for his satisfaction.

I'd broadly speaking agree with you. There's people with the know how (and they ain't govt ministers) Who might pay them is the question. If this wasn't a staged attack.

EireGun · 10-02-2014 10:23PM

MadYaker wrote: »

Has the journalist who broke the story read the report issued by the UK security firm who GSOC hired? Did he state that the equipment used would be beyond the reach of any normal member of the Gardai or anyone apart from a government agency?

I would just like to know where you're drawing the conclusion that the sort of equipment used would cost in the region of €500,000 and would only be available to gov agencies because from all the info I can find I'm not coming to the same conclusion. Mostly because as far as I can see the government don't really have a reason to want to spy on the ombudsman.

If there is high level corruption in the Gardai then there are probably a few who are making a lot of money.

Don't know whether John Mooney had access to the report by Verrimus. But, yes he did state that the level of technology used would be beyond the reach of individuals, criminals or terrorists, and was indicative of a government agency. On radio, he suggested that we should look no further than our own state, and that the fact the IP address of one of the hacking devices was traced back to Britain could be used as a "diversion". He says GSM cell tower spoofing occurred, which is generally local physical equipment, and costs up to and over half a million euro. I'd doubt anyone other than Garda CSB (Special Branch) and Defence Forces Directorate of Intelligence has access to it here in the Republic, and PSNI, MI5 and British Military in NI.

dxhound2005 · 10-02-2014 10:24PM

The GSOC statement is not very informative. It doesn't explain why the outside company was called in or who recommended them. And one paragraph in particular seems very strange, at least to me.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/full-statement-garda-s%C3%ADochana-ombudsman-commission-1.1686607

We took the difficult decision not to report this matter to other parties. We did not wish to point fingers unnecessarily and we did not believe that widespread reporting would be conducive to public confidence.

The only other parties they would be entitled to report this matter to would be the Gardai and/or the Minister for Justice. If they had done so how would that have constituted unnecessary finger pointing? And what has that do with widespread reporting, it would have been confined to those two parties.

who_ru · 10-02-2014 10:25PM

MadYaker wrote: »

I know this is AH but for the sake of discussion could you please add why you think he is wrong? With links to back yourself up would be nice too.

They are independent of government. They are not duty bound to report to it. This is because they are independent of govt.
The GSOC have on the record submitted reports to the govt highlighting deficiencies in Garda practices in the past. Nothing has happened as a result of these reports.
The fact that this was leaked to the Sunday Times in the UK speaks volumes about how unhealthy our democracy is.

EireGun · 10-02-2014 10:26PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

The GSOC statement is not very informative. It doesn't explain why the outside company was called in or who recommended them. And one paragraph in particular seems very strange, at least to me.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/full-statement-garda-s%C3%ADochana-ombudsman-commission-1.1686607

We took the difficult decision not to report this matter to other parties. We did not wish to point fingers unnecessarily and we did not believe that widespread reporting would be conducive to public confidence.

The only other parties they would be entitled to report this matter to would be the Gardai and/or the Minister for Justice. If they had done so how would that have constituted unnecessary finger pointing? And what has that do with widespread reporting, it would have been confined to those two parties.

There was no evidence of Garda misconduct. The Commission decided to
discontinue the investigation on the basis that no further action was
necessary or reasonably practicable.

... basically infers they suspected the Gardai as responsible, but couldn't prove it and such didn't want to say that publicly...

who_ru · 10-02-2014 10:27PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

The GSOC statement is not very informative. It doesn't explain why the outside company was called in or who recommended them. And one paragraph in particular seems very strange, at least to me.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/full-statement-garda-s%C3%ADochana-ombudsman-commission-1.1686607

We took the difficult decision not to report this matter to other parties. We did not wish to point fingers unnecessarily and we did not believe that widespread reporting would be conducive to public confidence.

The only other parties they would be entitled to report this matter to would be the Gardai and/or the Minister for Justice. If they had done so how would that have constituted unnecessary finger pointing? And what has that do with widespread reporting, it would have been confined to those two parties.

They suspect the guards are behind the bugging.

My name is URL · 10-02-2014 10:27PM

EireGun wrote: »

It is a cause of grave concern that the Garda Síochána Ombudsman
Commission's statement contains a clear indication that An Garda
Síochána was in some way suspected of complicity in this matter

Why would he be surprised that Gardai were suspected?

Of course Gardai are going to be suspected given the overall context and the business the GSOC are in. It would be extremely foolish to not suspect their involvement.

keano25 · 10-02-2014 10:29PM

Red Pepper wrote: »

I knew the Gardaí has become a law unto themselves but they really have crossed the line now. That commissioner is completely untrustworthy in my opinion.

Talk about jumping on the bandwagon..

There was a statement released by GSOC earlier stating that there was no evidence of Garda involvement in this, you plonker. :pac::pac::pac:

tomwaterford · 10-02-2014 10:29PM

EireGun wrote: »

Don't know whether John Mooney had access to the report by Verrimus. But, yes he did state that the level of technology used would be beyond the reach of individuals, criminals or terrorists, and was indicative of a government agency. On radio, he suggested that we should look no further than our own state, and that the fact the IP address of one of the hacking devices was traced back to Britain could be used as a "diversion". He says GSM cell tower spoofing occurred, which is generally local physical equipment, and costs up to and over half a million euro. I'd doubt anyone other than Garda CSB (Special Branch) and Defence Forces Directorate of Intelligence has access to it here in the Republic, and PSNI, MI5 and British Military in NI.

Somehow I trust this journalist above the gaurds and government...and what I expect to be a severly tightened leshed GSOC...it should make interesting reading,if this report is ever released....this is surly too big to be swept under carpet

dxhound2005 wrote: »

The GSOC statement is not very informative. It doesn't explain why the outside company was called in or who recommended them. And one paragraph in particular seems very strange, at least to me.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/full-statement-garda-s%C3%ADochana-ombudsman-commission-1.1686607

We took the difficult decision not to report this matter to other parties. We did not wish to point fingers unnecessarily and we did not believe that widespread reporting would be conducive to public confidence.

The only other parties they would be entitled to report this matter to would be the Gardai and/or the Minister for Justice. If they had done so how would that have constituted unnecessary finger pointing? And what has that do with widespread reporting, it would have been confined to those two parties.

AFAIK The English equililent of GSOC

dxhound2005 · 10-02-2014 10:31PM

EireGun wrote: »

... basically infers they suspected the Gardai as responsible, but couldn't prove it and such didn't want to say that publicly...

They wouldn't have to go public. Just report it to the Mininster.

Anyway I have a theory. Some disaffected Garda/Gardai let out the whisper that GSOC was being bugged. GSOC spent €18,000 in bringing in consultants to indentify some "electronic anomolies", meaning there wasn't anything there. Disaffected Gardai contact the Sunday Times to give them the story. Cue embarrassment for the GSOC and the widespread impression being given that they do not trust the Gardai or the Government enough to report an apparent crime being committed on their premises.

MadYaker · 10-02-2014 10:33PM

keano25 wrote: »

Talk about jumping on the bandwagon..

There was a statement released by GSOC earlier stating that there was no evidence of Garda involvement in this, you plonker. :pac::pac::pac:

Read between the lines ffs. What they meant is that the Gardai weren't involved in any official capacity, but from the evidence available its pretty obvious that members of the Gardai acting in their own personal interests would be the main suspects in any investigation.

tomwaterford · 10-02-2014 10:37PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

They wouldn't have to go public. Just report it to the Mininster.

Anyway I have a theory. Some disaffected Garda/Gardai let out the whisper that GSOC was being bugged. GSOC spent €18,000 in bringing in consultants to indentify some "electronic anomolies", meaning there wasn't anything there. Disaffected Gardai contact the Sunday Times to give them the story. Cue embarrassment for the GSOC and the widespread impression being given that they do not trust the Gardai or the Government enough to report an apparent crime being committed on their premises.

:pac::pac:
if what is being inferred/suggested by this journalist ''electronic anomalies'' is the least serious way of putting this

like saying if nuclear bomb attack on dublin that the iodine tablets will save you:rolleyes::rolleyes:!!!

Garda Ombudsman offices bugged

Comments