Re: yes but it is the WARRNT itself

I know, they just want to see the warrant so their editors can verify it. One of the reasons they're looking into this is because the wiki page we have on Endgame Systems, one of the firms listed on the warrant, disappeared from Google's search listings for a couple of days. It was the first Google result for "Endgame Systems" for six months, but then wouldn't come up at all even if one Google'd a "string" (something that is sure to bring up the page in question). We made this known, and several journalists and the author of a book on cyberwar verified it publicly, on Twitter. Then it came back up, and is once again the first result for Endgame Systems. No other page on our wiki was effected during this time; just that one. Incidentally, Endgame Systems took down its own webpage last year after it began to receive attention from a journalist at Bloomberg, whom we put on their trail. And as you know, our wiki is one of the topics listed on the search warrant. There are a couple of ways in which the wiki page could have been stricken off Google - and it was only Google on which it was stricken, the page came up as normal on Bing.

All in all, there's some suspicion that Endgame Systems may have engineered this, intended to keep it off Google altogether (there are a couple of ways in which this could be done, particularly since the firm has strong ties to the NSA and other government "clients," as well as Google's "national security division.") So I'd like to get a copy of the warrant over to the outlets that are interested in pursuing this so that they can start looking into it in earnest.

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Tom Mills <tmills@millsandwilliams.com> wrote:

not the sealed sw affidavit. That is where the detailed accusations are. Tom
Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 24, 2012, at 11:04 AM, "Barrett Bro

Also, can you have someone scan and send me a copy of that search warrant? Rolling Stone and Wired both want to take a look at it.

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 7:44 AM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:

Sure thing. Let me know how to proceed.

Still finishing the book, but they gave me a little more time - until the 30th - so I'm available to meet with you, or talk on the phone.

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Karen Lancaster <lancaster.karen@gmail.com> wrote:

Tom, OK.

Barrett, FYI.

Karen Lancaster

(214) 914-0455

lancaster.karen@gmail.com

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 7:01 AM, Tom Mills <tmills@millsandwilliams.com> wrote:

i will email austin contract to you. we will need ck. - CBS national TV would like an interview.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 20, 2012, at 9:36 AM, "Karen Lancaster" <lancaster.karen@gmail.com> wrote:

The Guardian just asked Barrett if he'd like to write op-ed on this pretty bizarre story, reported today in the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/usa-today-alleges-harassment-scheme/2012/04/20/gIQAaRjCVT_blog.html

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748