The Minister for Justice Alan Shatter is under all kinds of pressure, not least of which must be coming from above as An Taoiseach has today (19 February) had to answer further questions in the Dáil on the GSOC affair.
However, one area where Minster Shatter seems to be on increasingly firm ground, which may indeed prove to be the high ground, is the technical evidence that is emerging in the alleged GSOC surveillance.
Of the cited instances of supposed surveillance, two key ones were the UK 3G and the bogus Wi-Fi networks.
Now, as I had already pointed out, an ISMI Catcher could have been in operation in any of the many mobile phone ‘shops’ around the Abbey Street area, and as these devices are available over the Internet, as opposed to restricted to ‘government-level’ organisations, this really does not indicate a targeted surveillance effort.
But when Minister Shatter stood up in the Dáil yesterday, he added further detail to debate around the Wi-Fi networks.
It appears as if the bogus network was actually emanating a Bitbizz service in the Insomnia café that is part of the convenience store that shares the ground floor of the building with GSOC.
Now, if this network, or a device attached to it, was attempting to connect it speaks more to bad configuration rather than nefarious purpose.
Indeed, Minister Shatter goes on to say that he has received a report from an Irish company on the matter, RITS. Now RITS is one of the most respected information security companies in this country and one that I have worked alongside in a previous life. I can attest to its professionalism and experience in dealing with public service, and government, information security requirements.
So when the minister states: “The report… that I received from RITS gives as an opinion, based on the reports provided to RITS, that “there is no evidence of any technical or electronic surveillance against GSOC”, that is no evidence at all, not merely no definitive evidence. This report also disputes other conclusions reached by Verrimus.”
” I would put great stead on the conclusions of RITS in this instance, due to its knowledge and experience of Irish public service and governmental institutions”
Now I would not for a moment cast aspersions on the capability of Verrimus, but I would put great stead on the conclusions of RITS in this instance, due to its knowledge and experience of Irish public service and governmental institutions. In fact, it is a matter for concern that RITS was top of the list to conduct the investigation which GSOC commissioned that result in the involvement of Verrimus in the first place.
However, if RITS has concluded that “there is no evidence of any technical or electronic surveillance against GSOC”, to be honest, I’d go with that.
So, that leaves the conference phone device as the only anomaly. That said, I’d imagine that the RITS evaluation of the available evidence looks at this too in its overall assessment. But, in my opinion, there is not enough information in the public domain on this to make a definitive pronouncement, one way or t’other.
The other major implication from this is that the initial reporting by the Sunday Times must be called into question. Was it wildly paranoid in its interpretation or merely blinded by the science and tech jargon of the Verrimus report? Was it perhaps coloured by the source whose interpretation may have affected the way the information was passed on? We may never know.
However, from a purely technical perspective, I for one would be asking if this was merely a case of misinterpretation.
Subscribers 0
Fans 0
Followers 0
Followers