Garda Ombudsman offices bugged

My name is URL

Phoebas wrote: »

The very strange thing about this story is that this apparently happened last year, the GSOC investigation has been inconclusive and it seems that they haven't seen fit either to pursue it further or to report it to the Minister.

Its like they were just going to let it slide - perhaps this is what promoted the leaker.

Sure, there's questions to be asked of how the GSOC handled this but it shouldn't take precedence over the more pressing matter of who the hell is responsible for the bugging.

The media and government seem more interested in why the matter wasn't raised with Shatter more than the fact it happened in the first place.

Hootanany

Smoke and daggers

ygolometsipe

just spreading the rumor that there are talks of a movie.

An Depárted

charlie14

Uriel. wrote: »

You need to try harder

Is that what the Garda said to Shatter before he drove off without giving a breath sample?

Uriel.

charlie14 wrote: »

Is that what the Garda said to Shatter before he drove off without giving a breath sample?

Shatter might need to try harder but you surely need to try quicker, you were beaten to that "joke" awhile ago

Phoebas

My name is URL wrote: »

Sure, there's questions to be asked of how the GSOC handled this but it shouldn't take precedence over the more pressing matter of who the hell is responsible for the bugging.

The media and government seem more interested in why the matter wasn't raised with Shatter more than the fact it happened in the first place.

That's true - the bugging is by far the most serious part of this, but that assumes that the core of the story is true.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if this is explained away as some low level common or garden hacking that wasn't serious enough to report up the line, that was just misunderstood by the leaker as something much greater.
(they would have to publish the security report for people to accept that explanation 'though).

mikom

Phoebas wrote: »

I wouldn't at all be surprised if this is explained away as some low level common or garden hacking that wasn't serious enough to report up the line, that was just misunderstood by the leaker as something much greater.

Do you have “government-level technology” in your garden?

a sophisticated surveillance operation which used “government-level technology”

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/ireland/article1373695.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_02_08

Kaizersoze81

Uriel. wrote: »

Why does he need to resign? What makes them a law onto themselves?

Because they're obliged by law to disclose to the Minister for Justice matters such as this. They've broken the law by not disclosing it.

sopretty

Phoebas wrote: »

That's true - the bugging is by far the most serious part of this, but that assumes that the core of the story is true.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if this is explained away as some low level common or garden hacking that wasn't serious enough to report up the line, that was just misunderstood by the leaker as something much greater.
(they would have to publish the security report for people to accept that explanation 'though).

The 'government level' surveillance will debunk that fairly lively. I don't care what statements come out, there is deep corruption involved here in my opinion.

MadYaker

So far we have 99% speculation and 1% facts.

All we really know is that in December 2013 a specialist security firm from the UK confirmed "3 technical and electronic anomalies", I couldn't find anymore detail than that. GSOC says it doesn't suspect the Gardai were involved (officially) and its databases weren't compromised (as far as they can tell).

Why they decided not to tell anyone is anyone's guess, but I don't think it would be a stretch to say they don't exactly trust senior members of the Gardai even if they are saying they don't think the Gardai were involved. While I seriously doubt the Gardai were involved in any official capacity, maybe some of the less than honest members were making an attempt to keep on top of what sort of things the ombudsman was investigating, or maybe they were trying to get info on people trying to expose corruption within the ranks of the Gardai.

I'm not sure why they didn't tell Shatter though, I don't believe the conspiracy stuff being spouted in this thread. I don't really think Shatter is corrupt or had anything to do with this. Maybe GSOC were just being extra cautious, but if so, why?

Kaizersoze81

sopretty wrote: »

The 'government level' surveillance will debunk that fairly lively.

That's a nothing phrase. Surveillance such as this is accessible to anyone who has the money to pay for it.

Phoebas

mikom wrote: »

Do you have “government-level technology” in your garden?

Yes. In my underground bunker.
(see how anonymous sources can't be relied upon?)

downonthefarm

Don't think it was the guards in fairness.that lot couldn't find their hole with their two hands

Uriel.

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

Because they're obliged by law to disclose to the Minister for Justice matters such as this. They've broken the law by not disclosing it.

Really? What makes you say that?

mikom

Phoebas wrote: »

Yes. In my underground bunker.
(see how anonymous sources can't be relied upon?)

Hope you registered that septic tank.

My name is URL

Phoebas wrote: »

That's true - the bugging is by far the most serious part of this, but that assumes that the core of the story is true.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if this is explained away as some low level common or garden hacking that wasn't serious enough to report up the line, that was just misunderstood by the leaker as something much greater.
(they would have to publish the security report for people to accept that explanation 'though).

I honestly don't believe that the consultancy firm would come out and confirm their involvement in such a way if the original article was full of untruths.

Kaizersoze81

downonthefarm wrote: »

Don't think it was the guards in fairness.that lot couldn't their hole with their two hands

And you couldn't type a proper sentence with your two hands.

Uriel.

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

That's a nothing phrase. Surveillance such as this is accessible to anyone who has the money to pay for it.

Surveillance such as what? What kind of surveillance was undertaken?

Kaizersoze81

Uriel. wrote: »

Really? What makes you say that?

The taoiseach quoted a section from the garda siochana act which stated this.

twowheelsgood

MadYaker wrote: »

So far we have 99% speculation and 1% facts.

All we really know is that in December 2013 a specialist security firm from the UK confirmed "3 technical and electronic anomalies", I couldn't find anymore detail than that. GSOC says it doesn't suspect the Gardai were involved (officially) and its databases weren't compromised (as far as they can tell).

Why they decided not to tell anyone is anyone's guess

No need to guess.

GSOC chairman Simon O'Brien wrote: »

He said the Commission took the very difficult decision not to report the matter because it did not want to point the finger at anyone or undermine public confidence in the Ombudsman.

I have to say the "3 technical and electronic anomalies" is a touch short of the smoking gun I was expecting.

Uriel.

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

The taoiseach quoted a section from the garda siochana act which stated this.

What section?

Kaizersoze81

Uriel. wrote: »

What section?

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/three-anomalies-found-in-offices-garda-ombudsman-1.1686246

“Most importantly Section 80 subsection 5 of the Garda Siochana Act requires that GSOC would report unusual matters or matters of exceptional importance to the Minister for Justice and that’s a fundamental issue that GSOC needs to explain to the Minister for Justice,” he said.

Overheal

Learn something new from MIT, they publish virtually all of their course material for free free free

http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm

No diploma, but knowledge is free.

MadYaker

My name is URL wrote: »

I honestly don't believe that the consultancy firm would come out and confirm their involvement in such a way if the original article was full of untruths.

Ditto, I think it was a bit more than some IT student getting into their wifi network just to see if he could. They paid a firm from the UK €18,000 to carry out the survey, I don't think they would do that for any minor security breach.

Id love to see the actual report from the firm and id also love to know what exactly prompted them to get the survey carried out in the first place.

Phoebas

My name is URL wrote: »

I honestly don't believe that the consultancy firm would come out and confirm their involvement in such a way if the original article was full of untruths.

All they've really confirmed is that they did some work. Actually I'm surprised that they even went that far.
A security company that starts telling the world about their client's weaknesses (even past ones) would be a pretty crappy security company.

ygolometsipe

Overheal wrote: »

Learn something new from MIT, they publish virtually all of their course material for free free free

http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm

No diploma, but knowledge is free.

How to fill your day when you're unemployed?

ha

Uriel.

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/three-anomalies-found-in-offices-garda-ombudsman-1.1686246

“Most importantly Section 80 subsection 5 of the Garda Siochana Act requires that GSOC would report unusual matters or matters of exceptional importance to the Minister for Justice and that’s a fundamental issue that GSOC needs to explain to the Minister for Justice,” he said.

Did you read the section of the act?

Two very important words used in legislative instruments are "may" and "shall". 80(5) provides for a "may".

downonthefarm

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

And you couldn't type a proper sentence with your two hands.

Sorry I'm driving

who_ru

Shady Tady wrote: »

Whatever about not reporting to the police they were duty bound to report it to the government and they did not.

you are incorrect.

jimb43

CJC999 wrote: »

The guards can't investigate it and nor can gsoc so who will investigate it? I'd say it's a crock of ****.

gards carnt investigate who got outa the paper bag / or how, never mind that kind of "big brother tactic ! . More like OBAMA keeping an eye on his great great great relatives in money gall. and if he finds anything he sell it to garda, anyway to make a fast buck.

MadYaker

who_ru wrote: »

you are incorrect.

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.

Uriel.

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.

There's no legal obligation under the act.

tayto lover

jimb43 wrote: »

gards carnt investigate who got outa the paper bag / or how, never mind that kind of "big brother tactic ! . More like OBAMA keeping an eye on his great great great relatives in money gall. and if he finds anything he sell it to garda, anyway to make a fast buck.

If you were working in the Ombudsman's office nobody could decipher what you were saying.
What are you trying to say?

Shady Tady

a GSOC employee could have planted the devices and suggested they had got information to say that there were bugging devices in the buildings. The follow up search makes them look the business. The Garda did this in Donegal with explosives to boost their promotion hopes. This has too be cleared up as everyone from GSOC, Garda, Journalists and Government are suspects and any wild idea like mine can be thrown about.

Shady Tady

jimb43 wrote: »

gards carnt investigate who got outa the paper bag / or how, never mind that kind of "big brother tactic ! . More like OBAMA keeping an eye on his great great great relatives in money gall. and if he finds anything he sell it to garda, anyway to make a fast buck.

bit early t be on the sauce!!

Phoebas

tayto lover wrote: »

If you were working in the Ombudsman's office nobody could decipher what you were saying.
What are you trying to say?

His encryption algorithm is more complex than the one they use at the GSOC.

My name is URL

MadYaker wrote: »

Id love to see the actual report from the firm and id also love to know what exactly prompted them to get the survey carried out in the first place.

It was suggested yesterday that they were concerned about the number of their cases which were becoming public knowledge.

The Irish Times understands the three-person commission had always intended to conduct the same security sweep as its predecessors and in the second half of last year decided to act on that intention.

It is unclear what led to that action, though sources have suggested some senior staff in GSOC viewed with suspicion the level of detail that was emerging publicly about some of its ongoing cases.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/bugging-found-at-offices-of-garda-complaints-watchdog-1.1685345

CZ 453

This may be a bit of a conspiracy theory but didn't the GSOC have a lot of coverage over not being able to independently access the Garda pulse system. Maybe this is a ploy to get them more power. The type of power that internal affairs have in America.

EireGun

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.

knird evol

shezer wrote: »

This may be a bit of a conspiracy theory but didn't the GSOC have a lot of coverage over not being able to independently access the Garda pulse system. Maybe this is a ploy to get them more power. The type of power that internal affairs have in America.

Their bigger gripe was that documents weren't being disclosed to them. They said they were waiting three years for stuff in the case about the drug dealer, off the books informer. And then didn't get all the stuff they wanted.

Well they're likely to get new powers now. They will probably be able to march in and take documents, computers, everything.

This will probably work out very well for them.

mikom

Phoebas wrote: »

I wouldn't at all be surprised if this is explained away as some low level common or garden hacking that wasn't serious enough to report up the line, that was just misunderstood by the leaker as something much greater.
(they would have to publish the security report for people to accept that explanation 'though).

Then........

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.

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

Phoebas

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.

The report cites an unidentified 'source'. We can hardly take it as gospel.

Santa Cruz

jimb43 wrote: »

gards carnt investigate who got outa the paper bag / or how, never mind that kind of "big brother tactic ! . More like OBAMA keeping an eye on his great great great relatives in money gall. and if he finds anything he sell it to garda, anyway to make a fast buck.

"gards carnt investigate" That's right Mr. know all. The prisons of this country are overflowing with gob****es who thought that.

p.s. Have you heard of spell check?

dxhound2005

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.

You could have concluded your brilliant thesis by telling us who did it.

tomwaterford

Shady Tady wrote: »

a GSOC employee could have planted the devices and suggested they had got information to say that there were bugging devices in the buildings. The follow up search makes them look the business. The Garda did this in Donegal with explosives to boost their promotion hopes. This has too be cleared up as everyone from GSOC, Garda, Journalists and Government are suspects and any wild idea like mine can be thrown about.

I taught GSOC staff are appointed and their is no promotion and cant be sacked

Hootanany wrote: »

I hope this pathetic Government collapse's after this one roll on the Election.

That's the worse part of the story - no one anyway suitable to replace this government:mad::mad:
best of a very poor lot
any normal country there would be at least some effort to track down the buggers not blame the person who is bugged for not reporting it to authorities it has issues with

Surly someone knows something...still cant think of anyone else who would be likely to bug the GSOC...

tomwaterford

Santa Cruz wrote: »

"gards carnt investigate" That's right Mr. know all. The prisons of this country are overflowing with gob****es who thought that.

p.s. Have you heard of spell check?

though if it looks like a duck,walks like a duck, it probably is a ....;)

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

kerry4sam

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

Could be anyone. Journalists/British M15/Garda/Army/disgruntled gsoc employee.

...

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Let's not forget that you don’t show someone that you have broken their ciphers unless you have to!

I would like to know what GSOC did discover during the Security Sweep done by them, but doubt that will be revealed until absolutely no other option.

The investigation was completed on 17 December, 2013 & confirmed the existence of three technical and electronic anomalies. They were very quick to rule out Garda Misconduct though right here and said no further action was necessary or reasonably practicable.

Could be interesting times ahead.

dxhound2005

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

Both sound impressive but neither have been explained.

MadYaker

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.

"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....