Murdochs Pirate TV hackers

[benny/9]

have you seen this video? Murdochs Pirate TV hackers
Last nights Panorama programme on how Murdoch's NDS
hacked OnDigital and Canal+ add tt to the link

h**p://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01dlvbm/Panorama_Murdochs_TV_Pirates/

[poppyjack]

Blimey, great viewing, the Murdoch's are Pirates, who would of thought it!

[mr football]

Lee Gibling is a nonce who ran off to turky with his 15 year old girlfriend

[TheCoder]

Very old news with a slight update. Most of this stuff happened over 10 years ago and has been covered many times.

Dunno why its suddenly become newsworthy after all this time - guees its just open season on the Murdoch clan.

[the rock]

very old news this goes back to the hack for cable boxes

[TheCoder]

hmm, a very interesting link !

Murdoch cops blast over pay TV pirates (http://afr.com/p/national/murdoch_cops_blast_over_pay_tv_pirates_DwLdiPl1Q6b SwW5NaSnEkK)

Direct link to the mentioned emails

http://www.afr.com/rw/AFR/Web/Library/Zip/pay_tv_pirates_emails.zip

After reading a few of those, you definately get the feeling that NDS security consider themselves on a par with MI6/KGB and above any domestic law that interferes with their goals.

Considering NDS hired two high ranking ex UK police officers to head up the UK operation you really do have to wonder at the links between Sky group and the police, especially in light of the phone hacking revelations.

[toysoft]

Chinese Ex-Wife of Rupert Murdoch, a chinese spy ?

???: 06/17/13 (http://panchinese.blogspot.ch/2013_06_17_archive.html)

June 17, 2013 Monday
Pan-network insider: Positive divorce that woman is the General Political espionage
Pan net insider recently had learned from Beijing, the current worldwide uproar, that the media of divorce PLA General Political Department of the woman is the head of BPI card spy.

Beijing Pan-China network insiders said on one of his news source from the General Staff, said the General Political Department is currently a major earthquake, in response to the sudden divorce news. Transmitting from Beijing insider news out of the limited view, the eminent female spy could become Chinese espionage history's most legendary success story. The female freshman year in college when he was the General Political Department of the Guangzhou branch in absorption, trying to train to become a spy expatriates in Hong Kong. The female is very hard for the person to succeed in college and entering the United States during the exchange identities. Because outstanding performance, and in a very short period of time to get a U.S. green card, to get the attention the General Political Department, and formally decided to develop this member. After a successful arrangement, the woman in the first class with an international media empire in Hong Kong COO sit together, and ultimately into the Hong Kong media.

Beijing insiders said, was being set back Hong Kong China, the General Political Department of the pressure is very large, the task of controlling the entire Hong Kong media that the PLA General Political Department is responsible. General Political Department not only directly make arrangements for Phoenix, but also to control by controlling shares in Hong Kong newspapers. For some Western media controlled by the Hong Kong media, the officers went into the most effective way to become. Completely contrary to the General Political Department's surprise, the woman working ability is very strong, not only become the only Chinese TV management women, and start with the big boss about media empire on love, and eventually became his wife. This is after the founding of the General Political Department never had the results, but also to the General Political Department spy chief, prince leaves a say in the party election rather overstating vain.

Pan networks concentrated in verifying the news to understand the background of the woman and found it very extraordinary experience, including key people on the plane and get to know, at a cocktail party with a splash of wine way to attract attention, so artificial insemination birth a series of bizarre, surreal means, it is more than a Hollywood blockbuster spy even more exciting. Pan nets investigation found that the woman at Yale University tuition sources are not clear. Media reports its massive get an MBA tuition is intersected with the woman's boyfriend for five years to help. But Pan networks found before this, the boyfriend is not a rich man, surnamed Li, Chinese gymnastics is just one star in California opened a gymnastics school managers; And this manager position or through the woman, surnamed Li, Chinese gymnastics star with Introduction obtain. The woman, surnamed Li, Chinese gymnastics star with his wife live on campus of California State University roommate.

In addition, Pan-China network also suspect a Yale MBA students in Hong Kong there is no need Yuanduchongyang trainee. The most strange is that a trainee will buy first class ticket? It was in 1996, which is not a wealthy woman. Just before that same year, the woman he still out about her surnamed Li, Chinese gymnastics star opened in gymnastics college work.

More interesting is, Pan-China Network found that the female may apply for a U.S. green card cheating. The female in 1987 by a pair of American foreign teachers come to the U.S. to study, eventually became the mistress and the grounds of marriage apply for a U.S. green card. According to the man of the house, said he was really only the woman lived together for 4-5 months, because it was discovered she had with her boyfriend mentioned above having an affair while separated. Although it has worked hard compound, but eventually after marriage two years and seven months divorce. This obviously does not meet the requirements of the United States to keep at least two years of marriage valid.

According to the Pan-network messages and what they do background checks, sorting out the following schedule:

In 1986, the PLA General Political Department of absorption.
In 1987, after school to learn English for Americans the opportunity to meet a teacher.
February 1988, the use of this study in the U.S. foreign teachers for Americans to give up Chinese studies.
February 1990, with the U.S. teacher married.
June 1990, met another one is considered later to help the woman's boyfriend to pay tuition at Yale University.
July 1990, with the teacher separated from her husband.
February 1992 to ensure that the U.S. green card.
September 1992, with the teacher to divorce her husband.
1993, graduated from California State University, a bachelor's degree.
In 1995, her boyfriend went to Beijing that he went to Yale University to study MBA.
In 1996, after returning debriefing, officially became the General Political Department intelligence officers.
In 1996, several agents with the General Political Department, the successful first class on an airplane with a TV COO sitting next to and get to know.
May 1996, by which TV COO become a Hong Kong TV's apprentices.
In 1996, the trainee end, back to Yale University to complete their studies.
1996, graduated from the Yale School of Management, to obtain MBA.
In 1997, the Hong Kong TV formal employment and management positions to become the only Chinese women.
June 30, 1997, Hong Kong's return.
1997, with the international media giant, the TV bosses acquaintance.
June 1998, the official start date with the international media giant.
June 1999, the international media giant divorce, more than ten days after the marriage with the woman.
November 2001, the Women's artificial insemination birth to a daughter, to formalize property inheritance.
June 2013, the media giant to the woman filed for divorce.

Web exclusive Pan disclosure.

[Meat-Head]

Huh does anybidy care

?44555565566/day to watch repeats of repeats, repeated 20 times a day

[GastonJ]

Old news. Do you think other companies aren't examining competitors goods/methods/software etc? Happens all the time, however they don't normally publish the results so that the other company loses out. Do you think the CIA and MI5 etc don't?



UNCLASSIFIED


Problems and alternatives

Government Spying for Commercial Gain


Mark Burton
With the end of the Cold War, the roles and missions of US intelligence organizations are under scrutiny. Assumptions that presuppose the primacy of economic competitiveness in the post-Cold War era are spurring a reevaluation of the traditional view that the US Government should not use its intelligence assets to give US companies competitive advantages over foreign firms. Analysis of the concept of such government-sponsored industrial spying, however, reveals numerous potential problems. These include legal issues, limited cost effectiveness, multinational corporations and, potentially, an increased risk of international conflict if such actions are pursued aggressively. Nevertheless, other countries are doing it, US companies are victims of it, and the US Government has to decide what to do about it.
For the US, the options range from maintaining current policies to enacting drastic measures, including high import tariffs or economic sanctions, against those countries whose governments spy on US businesses. A more reasonable alternative would be the establishment of one or more international agreements between the US and its allies and possibly other countries that would restrict governments from using their intelligence capabilities to spy for commercial gain.


ConclusionsWhile current US policy, as recommended by Gates, does not include providing private business with government intelligence data for commercial gain, the question is apparently still open. It is a valid question and not simply a search for new missions by intelligence organizations seeking to preserve their budgets.
Nevertheless, the problems associated with legal issues, cost-effectiveness, multinational corporations, and the increased risk of international conflict indicate that government-sponsored spying for commercial gain is not worth the effort. Defensive counterintelligence policies aimed at combating foreign intelligence in the economic arena are worth continuing, but they are not a true long-term solution to the problem.
The formulation of one or more multinational agreements is, perhaps, the most reasonable long-term approach to take. Just as countries have developed treaties to reduce the dangers associated with military rivalry, so too can they develop mutual understanding and agreements regarding economic rivalry. Such agreements, if taken seriously, could foster an international environment in which economic competition would not be the harbinger of conflict among nations but would instead be the stimulus for business innovation and improved living standards worldwide.
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol37no2/html/v37i2a02p_0001.htm

[Meat-Head]

CONFUSED

Just do what the germans do, buy it no matter the cost, steal the research, then close the company or sell it at such a price with no research its not worth doing

[GastonJ]

CONFUSED

Just do what the germans do, buy it no matter the cost, steal the research, then close the company or sell it at such a price with no research its not worth doing

MS and a few other software companies have been doing that for a while now. Either buy the competition and close it down, or just beat the hell out of the competition if you don't want to buy it. I think MS had that in mind for Skype, but found out that Skype was much better than MSN. Rupes is no different, that's why he owns Sky Germany and Sky Italia, although in one case at least he was left with little choice.

[manhatten]

Just had a mail telling me that Rupes now owns The Cloud Wifi

[Meat-Head]

So does that mean fiwn the lub using the wifi going to get repeats of threads from dk, same post repeaded 3 times a day, then the thread you want repeating nil poi

[GastonJ]

I can't get the cloud, or any other wifi really so at least I escape the repeats and the rest of it. I do wonder whether Rupes is going for ISP's so that he can halt feeds from EPL games going to those users that use his ISP's. Getting any, or all, ISP's to ban/block sites is very difficult at least. A court order can only apply to named ISP's and my ISP keeps falling under the radar every time *shrug*

Though:


We;ve been part of BSkyB since February 2011 ***8211; so we*re uniquely placed to take WiFi to the next level.

So it's hardly recent.

[toysoft]

Neil Chenoweth from AFR reports :

I***8217;ve always regarded News Corporation's accounts as a little like Great Uncle Albert's watch. There's always something rattling around inside and if you shake it about enough, something interesting invariably falls out. Nothing wrong with that!

Today's Australian Federal Court of Appeal decision is horribly complicated but essentially focuses on a 1989 meeting where execs for four different subsi...diaries handed around a $3 billion cheque. The cheque ended up where it started. Just over a decade later it triggered a $A2 billion tax deduction after the $A fell against the greenback. It was an internal load between News Corp subsidiaries so there was no actual loss. But the court confirmed there was a $2 billion tax deduction.

That's the second big tax win for News Corp. Two separate internal shuffles that cost News nothing--nil-zero have given it $3.5 billion in tax deductions. Noice

Saturday 21st of July 2012: Numbers game

It's always a happy surprise to find long-lost mementos in a bottom drawer ***8211; photographs perhaps, the odd document say, or even a $2 billion unsecured demand note.
For public companies, these little discoveries spread cheer all around, particularly if it's two days before the end of the financial year.
On June 28, 2002, the News Ltd accountants were rummaging around the bottom of the filing cabinet when they came across documentation about a rather large US-dollar loan from one News subsidiary to another subsidiary called News Publishers Holdings
Naturally, they felt bound to repay the loan immediately. This incurred a $1.4 billion foreign exchange loss, which naturally was a tax deduction, as the Federal Court found this week, correcting a little misunderstanding by the Tax Office. Actually, News had reported another $630 million FX loss to another News company in June 2001 as well.
After News Corp reincorporated in the US in 2005, its accountants shuffled $35 billion of assets in a way that made no difference to capitalisation but created a $1.5 billion Australian tax deduction.
All up, that is $3.5 billion in Australian tax deductions from internal shuffles in Rupert Murdoch 's empire. It's like a little $1 billion present from Australian taxpayers to Our Rupe, though it's hard to locate the records of this in the News annual accounts.
Such modesty. That's terrific work by News accountants, perhaps less terrific work by the Australian government. As government mishandling goes, it's up there with pink batts in the ceiling and Building the Education Revolution.
There is a national newspaper that will be right onto a case of government profligacy like that.
Expect a campaign.

Saturday 03rd of July 2010
His paper money has great appeal

June 30 was a red-letter day for News Corporation's Australian princeling, John Hartigan, beginning with a resounding win in the Federal Court of Appeal against the naysayers at the Tax Office who were trying to accuse Rupert Murdoch's global empire of some sort of tax avoidance.
News ran into the problem back in 2005, after it had reincorporated in the US, that its US and UK operations were still owned by Australian subsidiaries which had a capital value of $39 billion. Moving them to the US could trigger a huge capital gain.
News got around this by having the subsidiary companies pay a $4 billion dividend to News Australia Holdings, then bought back their shares for $35 billion.
The dividend and the payment for the buyback were transferred to a US company which set up new holding companies in the US for $39 billion, all in the one day.
News Corp had lost nothing. Everything was the same, with a new US holding company . . . except that by paying part of the price as a dividend News was able to claim a $5 billion capital loss, which led to an Australian tax deduction of $1.5 billion.
There was absolutely no suggestion that it shaped the deal like that just to save a little money on tax, the Appeals Court ruled on Wednesday. No one could be more surprised at the result than News itself.
How much did this paper shuffling cost Australia as a tax benefit? The Prince likes to think of it as Australian taxpayers paying $567 million to see the back of Rupert Murdoch. This was loads better than the first plan, which was to buy him a gold watch
But really, that's all so 2005. Last Tuesday our Australian honcho, Our Harto was focused on new tax plays.
The changes afoot include a move by a company called Tejeku, which owns what used to be the old Herald and Weekly Times group of newspapers, which News took over back in 1987. Tejeku filed a notice it was about to redeem out of profits up to $1.2 billion of its own shares held by News Ltd at market value after redeeming $417 million of shares on June 26 last year.
Who would believe that News earned so much in Australia? Clearly that doesn't include the group's national newspaper.

[toysoft]

Email hygiene: News Corp, Secret Squirrel business and the double delete
Posted on August 13, 2013 by neilchenoweth

Among the many unkind words directed at Rupert Murdoch***8217;s News Corporation in the UK, some of the most hurtful have centred on its policies for document deletion. What could be more natural for a hygiene-conscious media company than to seek to clean out its email records from time to time?

News Corp Australia has no equivalent of Data Pool 3 containing millions of emails, to get misplaced en route to Mumbai. Australian court files show it has a much more rigorous approach to turfing out old emails. The key seems to be getting on the case early.

Chief counsel Ian Philip set the bar in 2005 by describing how News Australia execs don***8217;t keep electronic records of emails. They even use something called a fax machine.

Sumption: Now, as I understand it, your reason for writing the fax out in manuscript was to avoid creating an electronic record of the document?***8212;Philip: Yes.

Q: After sending it, you destroyed both the document and a manuscript draft that you had previously written?***8212;I did.

Q: And before you sent your fax to Mr Akhurst you telephoned him, didn***8217;t you, and asked him to destroy it as soon as he read it?***8212;I did ask him to destroy it, yes.

Seven***8217;s English barrister Jonathon Sumption cross-examining Ian Philip, December 12 2005.

Admirably thorough. But here***8217;s the thing. News Corp Australia is so good at keeping secrets and deleting old email records, does it affect the whole way they do business? How do you run a business without records***8211;or maybe just without accountability? The Australian operation seems to have had minimal interference or even scrutiny from head office in New York since Lachlan Murdoch stepped down as Australian chief in 2000. But perhaps that***8217;s a long bow.

A simple question: how many newspapers does Rupert Murdoch sell every day in Australia? It***8217;s about 1.3 million. But for former News Corp Australia CEO Kim Williams, the question was a world of pain. As Adele Ferguson put it:

***8216;Kim went to circulation and said ***8220;I want to see how the papers are selling every morning.***8221; He was told it couldn***8217;t be done and he went ballistic. For six months he was screaming at the circulation guys and wouldn***8217;t hear that it wasn***8217;t the way the system works, unless you want to spend $30 million to change it,***8217; a source said.

So where are the electronic records? Stop thinking of document deletion as a cover-up: what does it do to your business? What if the pristine hygiene that Philip describes is so rigorously applied that there is no centralized way of finding out anything?

Sumption: There is a central archive for the storage of documents in the Holt Street offices of News Limited, isn***8217;t there?***8212;Philip: I don***8217;t think so.

There is no central archive?***8212;No.

Are each executive***8217;s files stored separately?***8212;Yes.

In their own offices?***8212;Yes.

Sumption, ever the cynic, was quick to see pragmatic motivations for Philip the Hygeinist:

Sumption: And you were therefore conscious, were you not, of the danger of a document like the fax of 9 December becoming available to Seven for use in litigation?***8212;Philip: Yes.

And that***8217;s why you were concerned to destroy it?***8212;Yes.

Such base queries need not concern us here. We have a loftier aim. We are concerned with business efficiency:

Sumption: Between 1998 and 2002 did the executives of News Limited use e-mail?***8212;Philip: Yes.

Did that include you?***8212;Yes.

Mr Macourt?***8212;Yes.

New technology has been introduced, and Rupert Murdoch***8217;s execs are not afraid to grapple with it.

Sumption: Are you aware that for the whole period of some five years covered by this dispute only 49 internal e-mails have been disclosed?***8212;Philip: No.

Are you aware that, of those 49 e-mails, every single one is an e-mail that was found on a file of hard copy documents having been printed out at some stage and filed?***8212;If that***8217;s ***8211; I wasn***8217;t aware of that, but that does not surprise me, that they were printed out. I think it is a common practice to print important e-mails out. It is my practice.

Throughout this passage Philip is courteous, polite, modest. It is his practice. You can see his logic: Important emails***8212;let***8217;s print them out then.

Sumption: Did you know that, of the 49 hard copy e-mails that we have got, only 12 relate to the period before 31 December 2000?***8212;Philip: I didn***8217;t know that.

If not one e-mail has been retrieved from electronic storage, that seems to suggest on your evidence that every single individual executive***8217;s computer records have disappeared?***8211;Philip: I find that surprising. I would have thought my files ***8211; my own files are littered with copies of e-mails.

You mean your hard copy files or your computer files?***8212;Hard copy files.

Yes. I***8217;m asking you about the retrieval of e-mails from electronic storage. If not one e-mail has been retrieved from electronic storage as opposed to hard copy files, that suggests on your evidence that e-mails have disappeared from the personal computers of every relevant executive; is that your understanding of what has happened?***8212;If that***8217;s the total number of e-mails, then that***8217;s the explanation, that they are not retained on their individual computers anymore.

There***8217;s nothing necessarily wrong with this. But it***8217;s hard not to wonder how this affects the way that News keeps other business records, like circulation numbers. A while back I heard an anecdote that is probably just apocryphal that someone was hired as a consultant to modernize News Ltd***8217;s circulation records. He was subsequently made redundant with a payout that stipulated he could not talk about what he had learned. The back offices of News here have always seemed to me like a dark pool***8211;not perhaps by choice but simply because that***8217;s the way the system works at News..

Sumption: And are there so far as you are aware electronically stored e-mails on your hard disk still, or have they disappeared?***8212;Philip: I think ***8211; I don***8217;t think there would be any for the period ***8211; on the hard disk for the period covered by this litigation.

Is that because you have wiped them?***8212;It is my practice to delete e-mails after approximately two weeks.

After approximately two weeks. Mr Philip, in your line of work, above all, it is surely important for you to conserve a record of what you have said to other people and what they have said to you; isn***8217;t it?***8212;I do that by printing out copies of the e-mails.

Email hygiene requires continued vigilance. In this account, News executives like Philip are the constant gardeners:

Sumption: Does your business or does your office at any rate use Microsoft Outlook?***8212;I think so, yes.

Are you aware that in order to delete an e-mail under that system 15 you have to do two separate actions. You have to delete it from your current files, and you have to delete it from the file of deleted e-mails?***8212;Yes, I am aware of that.

So is the position that after about two weeks you deliberately delete your past e-mails from both places?***8212;Yes.

Why do you do that, Mr Philip?***8212;I delete them so that the record I have is the hard copy that I print out.

Why are you reluctant to have e-mails more than two weeks old remain even on the deleted files of your Outlook system?***8212;I ***8211; I just think it is a sensible thing to do. If you wish to delete something permanently, delete it.

Q: I see. So is the position this: that you have a policy of deleting things from your deleted files after about two weeks in case in future somebody might read your e-mails and draw adverse conclusions about you or News Limited from them?***8212;That***8217;s one reason why, yes.

The full transcript is here, from page 10 Ian Philip News Ltd Dec 12 05