RE: Bin Laden use of Internet

From: Williams, Jaymes (Jaymes.Williams@private)
Date: Wed Oct 10 2001 - 16:26:33 PDT

  • Next message: Zot O'Connor: "[Fwd: Show your American Pride!]"

    I read that Bin Laden stopped using cell or Sat phones because of the
    possibility of conversations being intercepted by one of the Federal Govt.s
    'three-letter' agencies.  
    
    What about the recent video that showed Suleiman Abu-Gheith [one of his
    second-in-command types] speaking and NOT Bin Laden?  Has anyone wondered
    why Bin Laden was not in the video?  Has he split for safer grounds?  Or,
    did a laser-guide bomb pay him a visit?
    
    The Taliban have said he's still in Afghanistan and he is safe.  Hmmm ...
    
    Jaymes Williams, CISSP
    Security Analyst
    PG&E National Energy Group 
    Gas Transmission Northwest 
    1400 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 900 
    Portland, OR  97201 
    Voice: 503.833.4508 
    Fax: 503.833.4523 
    jaymes.williams@private 
    
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Scott Elam [mailto:Scott.Elam@private]
    Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 7:29 PM
    To: HORN Dan E
    Cc: CRIME@private
    Subject: Re: Bin Laden use of Internet
    
    
    Don't worry about the internet.  The video of bin Laden that was
    recently broadcast over and over by Al-Jeezera likely contained messages
    for his operatives.  Press releases from the Taliban, couriers slipping
    over the border, small radio transmitters relaying messages over
    borders, etc.
    
    Some Sat phones can be disabled for certain countries.  The Sat's can
    probably triangulate the location of the phone or something.
    
    Scott
    
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: HORN Dan E [mailto:dan.e.horn@private]
    > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 5:18 PM
    > To: CRIME@private
    > Subject: Bin Laden use of Internet
    > 
    > The world knows that Bin Laden and his followers used the Internet to
    > formulate an attack the US (shame on him).  But to allow him to use it
    > in a similar manner to formulate another attack on the US would be
    > (parden my use of the term) same on us.  Maybe I am to simplistic in
    > this line of thought, but, why can't we simply have the Internic block
    > all Internet traffic out of Afghanistan?  Lets assume (I don't like that
    > word either but...) that Bin Laden is the ring leader, and that he makes
    > all of the major decisions and that his followers simply wait until they
    > are told to do something.  If this assumption is true and Internet
    > traffic was not allowed out of that country then Bin Laden wouldn't be
    > able to communicate to them (using this technology), and they (the
    > sleepers) would simply continue to sleep.  I know the Internet was
    > designed to exchange data but don't you think we should change the rules
    > during times of war?
    > 
    > Another question:  How is Bin Laden able to send out his messages during
    > this time of war (don't we want to keep is cry for help limited)?  Is he
    > using satalites, if so can't the data being received on the statalite be
    > either blocked or tapped?
    > 
    > Thanks,
    > 
    > Dan
    
    --
    Scott.Elam@private               GMT-0700
    Sun Microsystems / Network Security Group / Computer Emergency Response
    Team
    
    
    PG&E National Energy Group and any other
    company referenced herein that uses the PG&E name or
    logo are not the same company as Pacific Gas and
    Electric Company, the regulated California utility.  Neither
    PG&E National Energy Group nor these other
    referenced companies are regulated by the California Public
    Utilities Commission.  Customers of Pacific Gas and Electric Company
    do not have to buy products from these companies in order
    to continue to receive quality regulated services from the utility.
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun May 26 2002 - 11:27:07 PDT