Gary McKinnon

[Ron Collins]

I think I might be changing my opinion on Gary McKinnon.

I think a big distinction has to be made in this case. Mckinnon is not a super smart, genius, code warrior, all tech knowing super hacker from a Hollywood film that somehow managed to crack U.S. government security protocols. He didn't hack into the CIA mainframe by piggybacking on satellites or stolen passwords from some shady midnight exchange. The fact is he was a normal systems administrator that was aware of the vulnerability of a default windows setup. Specifically, he was aware that the "Admin" password in the default setting for that version of windows was always set to blank. Meaning no password. This vulnerability was made possible by another windows default setting allowing remote access. This combined with lazy system admins, techs, and a non-compartmentalized or properly segmented network (same lazy Sys Admins) enable the hack.

I mention this to say that, once inside a network a major problem with pre-McKinnon government wide security protocols was that they assumed you had the right to be there.

So, Mckinnon would simply login to these machines under that wide open admin account using remote access software. Then he had access to the network and the chance to access other machines in that network or adjacent networks or shared networks. Then he used port scanners and VNC to gain access to other systems. The most exotic item he had in his arsenal to pull this off was balls.... or stupidity depending on your vantage point.

He isn't being charged with writing a worm or virus. Here is what they say about him.
London, England Hacker Indicted Under Computer Fraud and Abuse Act For Accessing Military Computers (November 12, 2002)

So he accessed 92 systems, and deleted critical system files causing a 2000 user network to close for 3 days. BS! What network with 2000 nodes doesn't have backups? He only accessed 92 systems. Even if several of them were servers, how was it down for 3 days. Something about the US Governments case smells. Personally, I think it has less to do with UFO's and more to do with mitigating the press exposure of such a massive security vulnerability by pointing to one guy and saying in essence "He is the only one. We are certain nobody else got it!" Then they throw the book at him, a 70 year sentence, and say it is a warning to hackers. Thus hiding the security issue in plain sight.

As for McKinnon, I honestly believe that his initial reasoning was to find information about UFO's. Then it was just to poke around where he shouldn't. I have a suspicion that his revelations of imagery and names are a convenient excuse and a plea for support. For someone who says that this was his driving motivation, he is sure short on detail. That lack of detail is precisely why I don't believe him. The filename and folder-name would be burned into my longterm memory no matter how excited/shocked/scared I might be. Finding a log of ship to ship transfers like that, I would have written some down. He claims he tried to follow up on ship names, but says he now cant remember them.

When I first heard his story and watched his interview, I thought he was lacking on detail because he was using it as leverage or because the interviewer/editor deemed it not necessary for the angle they were shooting for. In fact it is not there because he can't remember. Why can't he remember the single greatest moment in his his life at that time? The entire reason he began hacking? Because he was smoking a bunch of dope! Yep, he blames his memory loss on the whacky weed. (Jon Ronson meets hacker Gary McKinnon | World news | The Guardian )

I call bullshit! He got busted taking a peak at various and sundry systems. Now they initially tried to give him a plea bargain to make the story go away. McKinnon assumed that meant that they were afraid he had actually found the secret UFO files. So being stupid... (or if you prefer, deciding to once again use his extraordinarily large balls) he denied the plea bargain hoping to get a dismissal or shorter sentence if he threatened to release all his UFO information. But I contend that they really didn't want to expose the depth of the vulnerability. So he hacked, got caught, embellished, bluffed, and they called him on it. Now he has spent years fighting extradition. Thats my new theory. Any takers?

 

[Simonemendez]

As for McKinnon, I honestly believe that his initial reasoning was to find information about UFO's. Then it was just to poke around where he shouldn't. I have a suspicion that his revelations of imagery and names are a convenient excuse and a plea for support. For someone who says that this was his driving motivation, he is sure short on detail.

I know that I could ---never--- recall, to this very day, a lot of the text ( ---especially the detail) of the Top Secret Ufo telex I had unauthorizedly posessed. I sat on that thing for a -long- while, before I was found out. Strange!
Back in 1990, some Ufologist did a 'regression' for me, at a conference I went to. To see if some of that lost info (within my memory?) could be recovered. But all I did was cry. None of us (---chiefly--- ME) expected that kind of result from the hypnotism. I just wanted to go crawl under a rock and never come back out and be seen again!

Yeah, I think McKinnon would be more believable if he did NOT have prior Ufo interest and knowledge. BUT, I wondered why he would come up with something SOooooo peculiar and odd, as 'Secret Space Program' Astronauts, instead of something more resembling the Ufo document that I held?

 

[Kieran]

I know that I could ---never--- recall, to this very day, a lot of the text ( ---especially the detail) of the Top Secret Ufo telex I had unauthorizedly posessed. I sat on that thing for a -long- while, before I was found out. Strange!
Back in 1990, some Ufologist did a 'regression' for me, at a conference I went to. To see if some of that lost info (within my memory?) could be recovered. But all I did was cry. None of us (---chiefly--- ME) expected that kind of result from the hypnotism. I just wanted to go crawl under a rock and never come back out and be seen again!

Yeah, I think McKinnon would be more believable if he did NOT have prior Ufo interest and knowledge. BUT, I wondered why he would come up with something SOooooo peculiar and odd, as 'Secret Space Program' Astronauts, instead of something more resembling the Ufo document that I held?

Ya i agree. Don Ecker before has commented on the fact there is photos that show activity on the moon. It wasn't activity carried out by Apolllo Astronauts seemly. So who the hell else is up there? It was either some Alien activity in the past or there is a secret space program and the public is in the dark to such a project.When the Astronauts when to the moon in 1969, how much did it cost then surely the price tag for the same materials and equipment is much cheaper today. Use the same stuff with a slight upgrade.

 

[Simonemendez]

Good points. One thing that has always ---really bothered--- me about U.S.'s 'travel to the moon' is, not only have we "never"(?) went there again, but HOW is it, that, when spaceship parts broke down, we were able to repair them with DUCT TAPE for Godssake, but in 2010, we don't have the money and technoknowhow? And as for the money, those were the days when my parents moved us into a four bedroom two story house with a full basement and big backyard, for a whopping $50,000. !
I don't want anyone piling on me for being a 'disbeeleever', but people have a RIGHT to QUESTION a great many things that just do not add up about those missions. (Like for example accounts I have come across, of tight-lipped unfriendly [ almost paranoid] acting Astronauts, etc.) I could very ---easily--- believe that this low-tech clunky means was perhaps a cover for something else, if not an Intel hoax against the Soviets, as well as, that we did go there, but something really weird and kinda scary-bad popped-up,...............(Like those odd things that are not supposed to be there?.....)

 

[paraschtick]

Good points. One thing that has always ---really bothered--- me about U.S.'s 'travel to the moon' is, not only have we "never"(?) went there again ...

Maybe you should check out the "Wagging the Moondoggie" section on Dave Macgowan's website (here: http://davesweb.cnchost.com). He maybe not 100% scientifically correct 100% of the time but he makes some interesting points. Things like how the LEM (I think it was) kept out the cold/heat with a very thin piece of aluminium ... I think it was.

Another interesting thing was that the people who put the spacesuits together were the same people who made bras. Yep ... bras led the way to spacesuits ... .

Anyway, there's certainly enough stuff there to make you go hmmm ...

Also you may like to check out Jay Weidner's pages (here: http://www.jayweidner.com/AlchemicalKubrickIIa.html) on how he thinks Stanley Kubrick faked the moon landings.

May all be total cobblers of course ... but it makes you look at things in a different way ... which sometimes I think is good .

[ps ... and the whole NOT going back to the moon thing has also sat badly with me too. Hey lets NOT go back to the Moon since ... well ... since we've done that and that would be far to difficult to do. So lets go to Mars instead ... which will be even more difficult but in some ways less difficult than going to the Moon ... which is closer ... by quite a lot actually ... hmmmm.]

 

[Xylo]

I've always thought that the moon would be an awesome starting point for any and all space travel...1/6 the gravity and a spacecraft would be able to slingshot to higher speed using earth's gravity...what could be better?

So we're not going back why?

 

[trainedobserver]

So we're not going back why?

It seems to be, like so many other things, political. No one wants to take the political risk of championing what many people unfortunately see as a frivolous enterprise.

 

[paraschtick]

It seems to be, like so many other things, political. No one wants to take the political risk of championing what many people unfortunately see as a frivolous enterprise.

Yeah ... I don't know about that. I mean isn't going back to Mars a bit frivolous really??? If you're going to spend lots of money, at least spend it on something closer to Earth. Then if anything major goes wrong you wouldn't have to spend huge amounts of money on a rescue plan ... that is if you want to rescue your poor stranded astronauts.

Anyway ... who really knows??? Its all very straange to me. I thought it would have been better to carry on with the moon missions. In that way, technology would have got cheaper, and it would have been easier to do things with the same amount of money.

Good thing is though ... coming back to the main point of this thread ... its looking more likely that Mackinnon will be tried in the UK rather than being deported to the US (which was incredibly stupid and callous in my mind anyway ... for someone with such a condition as he has).

He still may go to jail, but at least he will be in his own country ...