Re: help

I haven't read it, but I've just heard from an editor I know who got a
review copy and let me know about a couple of things that made it in
regarding some of the things I and a few others were looking into
after HBGary, such as Booz Allen Hamilton's "project" for which Barr
was brought into a meeting and which seems to have had something to do
with Barr's "specialized" interests, and perhaps even Wikileaks and
Anon. To the extent that this and a few other issues actually get some
attention now, I'm happy. My agenda has been largely wrapped up in
trying to ensure that the opportunity that arose from the HBGary
e-mails and their contents was taken advantage of, and that those who
were involved in some of these things be forever known for them. Too
many people, like Matthew Steckman at Palantir, got away with what
they were planning to do, and as such there's no reason for others in
the industry to refrain from doing the exact same things, and worse,
to any activist group or individual who gets on the wrong side of an
entity that can pay for covert, high-end discrediting. That anyone was
caught in Team Themis was very, very lucky, and that's not likely to
happen again, so it's just going to go on and on.

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Reitman, Janet
<Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:

I reached out to him, he responded, we've been talking - and i owe you a
major thanks. I appreciate it much. And yes, i think that oddly, some people
are emerging who are eager to set the record straight, such as it is, b/c of
Parmy's book. Did you read it? I am about 2/3 of the way through and like it
- it's heavily reported. But then I'm reading it as someone who didn't know
much of this stuff, so I'm not in the position to judge accuracy. Curious
what your thoughts are when/if you read it.



J.

Janet Reitman
Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone

office: 718 285 9394
cell: 917 447 4843
email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
Twitter: @janetreitman
Skype: janetreitman



This message is the property of Wenner Media LLC or its affiliates. It may
be legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the use
of the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy, or otherwise
reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it to be viewed by any
individual not originally listed as a recipient. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or the taking
of any action in reliance on the information herein is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify
the sender and delete this message. Thank you.

-----Original Message-----


From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Thu 5/31/2012 7:09 PM
To: Reitman, Janet
Subject: Re: help


You can simply copy and paste the Arabic into Google translate to see
what it means, although I doubt it's anything significant. I'm not
sure exactly what the one million dollar reference is, unless it has
something to do with Stratfor and the money Sabu is alleged to have
requested from Wikileaks for the e-mails, although it may very well be
something else. But this person was earlier using the hashtag
#insideinfo or something and seems to be motivated by the appearance
of Parmy Olson's book and other such things that he feels (probably
correctly) contain mistaken information or give off mistaken
impressions, so I'd imagine he'd be willing to talk if he decides
you're in a position to set anything straight.

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Reitman, Janet
<Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:

Interesting, i just sent him a note on Twitter but i notice he has an
arabic
and english thing - i have no idea what the arabic says, do you? also,
what
are they talking about w/r/t the "one million dollar thing"? ...



Janet Reitman
Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone

office: 718 285 9394
cell: 917 447 4843
email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
Twitter: @janetreitman
Skype: janetreitman



This message is the property of Wenner Media LLC or its affiliates. It may
be legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the use
of the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy, or
otherwise
reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it to be viewed by
any
individual not originally listed as a recipient. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or the
taking
of any action in reliance on the information herein is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please immediately
notify
the sender and delete this message. Thank you.

-----Original Message-----


From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Thu 5/31/2012 2:13 AM
To: Reitman, Janet
Subject: Re: help


That's not something that anyone is going to be able to answer with
any certainty, other than Hammond himself. The odds are that they
simply met on IRC at some point, as Sabu had tons of "incoming
contacts" like anyone else who was well-known in the movement. How
exactly the two met would unlikely have come up in any conversation
very often, if at all, much less among anyone who is still free, or
even going under the same name. Basically, the few people I would
think of that could even potentially answer it have all been arrested
and probably wouldn't know themselves, nor would they be inclined to
answer my questions -especially now that I've been raided by the FBI
and thus "compromised." And even in general, finding out how and when
a particular person got involved in Anon is almost impossible without
getting a truthful answer from the person involved, even when such a
person went only under one nickname, as opposed to the countless
nicknames Hammond used. There are questions I myself have about
certain things, and which I'm not able to find answers to, simply
because Hammond and Sabu were the only two people in that variable
"core" of Antisec (as opposed to Lulzsec) that I dealt with or ever
met.

The only lead I can give you in terms of anyone who might know these
things and be willing to talk is this person who's recently popped up
on a Twitter account, @antiprosec, and who seems to be intent on
"setting the record straight" insomuch as that he keeps tweeting about
what happened in Antisec and seems to have liked Hammond, whom he
knows as sup_g according to a tweet he just put out. I would suggest
sending him a message via Twitter and asking him to e-mail you.


On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:14 AM, Reitman, Janet
<Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:

Hey Barrett,

So I need your help - please. Somehow, I need to find a person, or
persons
who can tell me how Jeremy Hammond ( anarchaos/tylerknowsthis/burn/sup_g
-
whatever, he had a millions nicknames) met Sabu. It's a huge hole in my
story - which is largely about Hammond, his history of activism and so
forth, but the part about how he got involved with Anon, how he met Sabu
and
was drawn into the #AntiSec thing is a huge mystery. None of Jeremy's
real
life friends can answer this as they are largely clueless about
hacktivism.

So i am appealing to you and your many contacts - thinking there must be
someone in your network who could help answer a few of these questions,
anonymously. This would all be strictly on background, but it's just
essential. Can you think of anyone or could you reach out to a few people
who might be able to help?

I'd hugely appreciate it. Let me know.

Thanks so much -
Janet


Janet Reitman
Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone

office: 718 285 9394
cell: 917 447 4843
email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
Twitter: @janetreitman
Skype: janetreitman



This message is the property of Wenner Media LLC or its affiliates. It
may
be legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the
use
of the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy, or
otherwise
reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it to be viewed by
any
individual not originally listed as a recipient. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or the
taking
of any action in reliance on the information herein is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please immediately
notify
the sender and delete this message. Thank you.

-----Original Message-----


From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Fri 5/25/2012 8:27 PM
To: Reitman, Janet
Subject: Re: Barrett here

This might be useful to you, though; I just made it public today:
http://pastebin.com/39efLk07

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com>
wrote:

I have no way of knowing. I only learned that it was happening more
than a week after it had begun, and I never asked who had originated
the idea.

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Reitman, Janet
<Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:

Hey Barrett -

Quick question: whose idea was it to target STratfor? And why stratfor?



Janet Reitman
Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone

office: 718 285 9394
cell: 917 447 4843
email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
Twitter: @janetreitman
Skype: janetreitman



-----Original Message-----
From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Sat 4/21/2012 6:48 AM
To: Reitman, Janet
Subject: Re: Barrett here

I agree, and Keith Alexander obviously overstated the threat when we he
came out with the idea that Anon would be taking out power stations in
two
years. They're going to try to to take advantage of what they can for
their
own purposes, of course.

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Reitman, Janet <
Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:

**


I just wonder if the FBI hasn't exaggerated the threat here - true
Lulzsec
made US security look bad, but aside from the HB Gary hack, and maybe
Stratfor, exactly how much real damage they caused is a question. It's
one
thing to say you can do something and thumb your nose at authorities;
it's
another to do serious destruction and pose a real threat.



Janet Reitman
Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone

office: 718 285 9394
cell: 917 447 4843
email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
Twitter: @janetreitman
Skype: janetreitman



-----Original Message-----
From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com
<barriticus@gmail.com>]
Sent: Fri 4/20/2012 5:45 PM
To: Reitman, Janet
Subject: Re: Barrett here

Assange has been the greatest single threat for a while, and probably
remains so. The Lulzsec guys did some damage to our cause by virtue of
some
of their more pointless acts, but managed to make U.S. security look
bad
in
general and occasionally got some real info that mattered. But before
Lulzsec, Sabu and Kayla had hit HBGary, which ended up providing
unprecedented raw material by which people like myself could paint a
picture of the contracting industry. So Sabu in particular was still a
major potential threat until he was turned. There are other, quieter
hackers of the sort who don't deface websites but only go for data,
but
I
don't know much about them and I'm not sure what the FBI may know of
them.
David House, with whom I'm friendly, is always getting spied on due to
his
association with Manning. Jacob Applebaum is also under perpetual
observation. Apparently I was considered an ongoing threat by many of
these
companies and their FBI buddies by virtue of having kept the issue
alive,
pulling out a few more secrets like Romas/COIN, and my unusual media
access; but even after being raided, I can still do my thing, which is
entirely legal, at least until they come with up some bullshit
"conspiracy
to" grey area thing or whatever else they're planning on charging me
with.
I know that since my warrant lists Lulzsec and the company Infraguard
-
neither of which I had anything to do with, other than talking to
Topiary
and a couple of the hangers-on - they're getting at least some
confused
information on my role.

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Reitman, Janet <
Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:

**


hey thanks - will read now.

So here two questions i have, curious if you had any ideas on this:

Who is/was the FBI's Most Wanted in this whole cyber/anon world? -
and
if
it's Assange, then who's next after him?
Any idea where the Lulzsec guys ranked on that scale of most wanted?




Janet Reitman
Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone

office: 718 285 9394
cell: 917 447 4843
email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
Twitter: @janetreitman
Skype: janetreitman



-----Original Message-----
From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com
<barriticus@gmail.com><

barriticus@gmail.com>]

Sent: Fri 4/20/2012 1:28 PM
To: Reitman, Janet
Subject: Re: Barrett here

Here's the op-ed, might also work as a good summary of what's gone
down,

as

opposed to the wiki, which is kind of all over the place.





http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/apr/20/cyber-misinformation-campaign-against-usa-today



On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Reitman, Janet <
Janet.Reitman@rollingstone.com> wrote:

******


hey - thanks for getting back to me. Can we talk about the guys in
Lulzsec? I'm doing a story about them - basically a piece
chronicling

the

evolution of that part of Anon into a more political/radical
movement,

with

a focus on the Lulzsec/Antisec crew - and was hoping you could
talk
to

me

about them, anything you recall, any insights you have (i'm
essentialy
trying to profile these people without being able to interview
them,

which

i know you can understand is extremely hard...)

Can we set up a time to talk/skype/chat/etc?

Let me know...
ps - saw that profile of you in D Mag was nominated for an ASME,
which

is

a big honor for the writer. Were you happy with the piece?


Janet

Janet Reitman
Contributing Editor - Rolling Stone

office: 718 285 9394
cell: 917 447 4843
email:janet.reitman@rollingstone.com
Twitter: @janetreitman
Skype: janetreitman



   This message is the property of Wenner Media LLC or its
affiliates.

It

may be legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only
for

the

use of the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy,
or
otherwise reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it
to

be

viewed by any individual not originally listed as a recipient. If
the
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby
notified that any unauthorized disclosure, dissemination,
distribution,
copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the information

herein

is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in

error,

please immediately notify the sender and delete this message.
Thank

you.


-----Original Message-----


From: Barrett Brown
[mailto:barriticus@gmail.com<barriticus@gmail.com><

barriticus@gmail.com><

barriticus@gmail.com>]

Sent: Tue 4/17/2012 9:21 AM
To: Reitman, Janet
Subject: Barrett here


How can I help you?

--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748



--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748



--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748



--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748




--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748




--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748




--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748




--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748




-- 
Regards,

Barrett Brown
940-735-9748