The Islamic Insurgents (catch all)

[Bill Moore]

Once the smoke clears and the story becomes clearer I'll probably roll it up another thread. A "possibility" this may belong to the LeT thread, but simply too early to say.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/1...7AP06A20111126

Philippine police and the FBI have arrested four people that Manila said were paid by a militant Saudi Arabian-based group to hack into U.S. telecom AT&T's system, but the company said it was neither targeted nor breached.

The Philippines' Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) said those arrested in Wednesday's operation in Manila with the Federal Bureau of Investigation were paid by the same group the FBI said had funded the November 2008 attacks in Mumbai.

"The hacking activity resulted in almost $2 million (1 million pound) in losses incurred by the company," the CIDG said in a statement.

This may be another example of where organized crime and terrorist converge, and they assumed the Philippines would be present an easy operating environment? Interesting claim that a group in Saudi funded the LeT attack in Mumbai. Suspect we'll more, perhaps a lot more in the days to come.

[davidbfpo]

Bill,

Interesting claim that a group in Saudi funded the LeT attack in Mumbai.

I'm reading and enjoying Stephen Tankel's book on LeT and he makes it clear some of their funding did come from private parties in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia. Not got to the Mumbai chapter yet and will report back.

[Bill Moore]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/wo...errorists.html

According to the agency, the men were working with a group called Jemaah Islamiyah, a terrorist group linked to Al Qaeda and responsible for the 2002 bombings in Bali, which killed 202 people.

The group has been held responsible for several other terrorist attacks in Southeast Asia, mostly in Indonesia but including the Philippines.

If the new accusation holds up, it would point to a troubling connection between hackers and terrorist cells.

Now they're suggesting it is JI. What is interesting is the potential current link between JI members (potentially) and Arab financiers. For those wiser on this type of hacking incident (probably most folks between the ages of 14 and 35) is the intent to make money or acquire sensitive information? Why did the Saudi group fund this activity? An investment to start up an illicit business, or to facilitate future attacks?

[Dayuhan]

Local reports suggest that the hacker group was stealing money from the victim companies and diverting it to their sponsors while keeping a percentage.... in short, that the money flow was not from the Saudi group to the Filipino group, but the other way around. The alleged "links" to various organizations are not entirely clear and should be treated with skepticism.

An interesting situation, but the published information is far too vague and incomplete to reach any kind of conclusion.

[Bill Moore]

Dayuhan, I should have reached out to your initially based on your location, but as you wrote not enough information available yet to even begin to connect the dots on this one.

All the articles said the hackers were financed by a Middle Eastern Cell, and the hackers get commissions, so what is the motivation of the hackers to work for commissions instead of taking it all? The Saudi national appears to play a key facilitation role that actually is critical in the over all business scheme?

[jmm99]

and for each of you, Bill, David and Steve, I really mean the term "gentlemen" ...

Here is a "WHAT IF": If this hacker effort and also Mombai (where folks were killed) were "materially supported" ($$$) by a "Saudi Group", can that "Saudi Group" be "declared hostile" and its members "neutralized" (killed, captured or converted - with "killed" always an option) ?

Theoretically, a member of a "declared hostile" group (engaged in an "armed conflict") can be killed anytime, anyplace - whether armed or unarmed, etc.

What think you ?

Not, BTW, as to "legality".

What is your gut reaction to whacking these guys - IF they "materially supported" Mombai ?

Regards

Mike

[Dayuhan]

and for each of you, Bill, David and Steve, I really mean the term "gentlemen" ...

What is your gut reaction to whacking these guys - IF they "materially supported" Mombai ?

That would depend on the extent and nature of the material support. Were they actively involved in planning and providing specific support for a known operation, or did they send LeT some gear that ended up being used in Mumbai, or something else altogether?

I certainly wouldn't suggest whacking anybody on the basis of information currently available to me.

[davidbfpo]

Edited JMM's question for brevity

Here is a "WHAT IF": If this hacker effort and also Mombai (where folks were killed) were "materially supported" ($$$) by a "Saudi Group", can that "Saudi Group" be "declared hostile" and its members "neutralized" (killed, captured or converted - with "killed" always an option) ?

Theoretically, a member of a "declared hostile" group (engaged in an "armed conflict") can be killed anytime, anyplace - whether armed or unarmed, etc.

What think you? Not, BTW, as to "legality".

What is your gut reaction to whacking these guys - IF they "materially supported" Mombai ?

I'd prefer not to "whack" whoever was involved, well not to start with. My preference is for options that reduce their credibility in their community cum audience, e.g. found driving drunk when in the French Riviera. Some inspired "Nigerian" fleecing of their assets and sewage in villa swimming pools. Not allow them (and family) to travel too far, but don't tell them till they arrive at JFK. Add in a few key messages, like "We know what you did. We haven't started yet".

"Whacking" may only make them a martyr and not stop others giving $$$ to the violent Jihad.

[Dayuhan]

I only know what I've seen in the public accounts. Coverage here has been a bit more extensive but not much.

All the articles said the hackers were financed by a Middle Eastern Cell, and the hackers get commissions, so what is the motivation of the hackers to work for commissions instead of taking it all? The Saudi national appears to play a key facilitation role that actually is critical in the over all business scheme?

The question above is fairly obvious and I wondered about that too, but nothing in the published accounts explains it. Possibly the Saudi group was providing some target information or financial infrastructure that the Filipino group needed, but that's speculation. After all, how much "financing" is really needed to set this sort of thing up?

Here:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/1...7AP06A20111127

It says:

Police in the Philippines said money from the scams was diverted to accounts of a Saudi-based group that was not identified.

So it's possible that the money was being bounced directly to accounts outside the Philippines by someone who subsequently paid the hack group their cut. They might have thought that would cover their tracks, but again that's speculation. From the same source:

Hackers broke into the phone systems of some AT&T customers and made calls to expensive international premium-rate services, according to a person familiar with the situation who was not authorized to discuss it publicly.

Such scams are relatively common, often involving bogus premium-service phone lines set up across Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia.

Fraudsters make calls to the numbers from hacked business phone systems or mobile phones then collect their cash and move on before the activity is identified. Telecommunications carriers often end up footing the bill for the charges.

That doesn't suggest that anything uniquely sophisticated was involved.

I've seen nothing addressing the question of whether the Filipino hackers were ideologically involved or just in it for the money.

The JI link is discussed:

Sosa said the Filipinos were being paid by a group originally run by Muhammad Zamir, a Pakistani arrested in Italy in 2007. He said Zamir was a member of Jemaah Islamiah, a Southeast Asian militant network with links to al Qaeda.

That sounds a little suspect, as JI is a SE Asian group and "members" would normally be from Indonesia or Malaysia. Zamir might have been a financier or link to Pakistani organizations, that isn't specified. It's always wise to be cautious about reading too much into these claimed links, and in any event Zamir has been in custody since 2007 and is cited only as a former leader of this shadowy Saudi group.

In short, both the JI and LeT connections remain alleged and a bit uncertain, very hard to put all of it together in any meaningful way without knowing a lot more.

It seems that all the news is coming from Philippine sources; the FBI isn't talking. It's not clear whether the FBI was involved because of the alleged terrorist connections or simply because a cyber-scam directed at Americans was traced back to the Philippines.

It's possible that this was a real saber-toothed terror finance scheme, also possible that it fell more toward the "crime" end of the terror-crime continuum, and the police here are playing up the terror connection to make themselves look more impressive. Maybe a little of both. More questions than answers, in any case.