The FBI Can't Find 'Missing' Records of Its Hacking Tools (404media.co) 18
The FBI says it is unable to find records related to its purchase of a series of hacking tools, despite spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on them and those purchases initially being included in a public U.S. government procurement database before being quietly scrubbed from the internet. From a report: The news highlights the secrecy the FBI maintains around its use of hacking tools. The agency has previously used classified technology in ordinary criminal investigations, pushed back against demands to provide details of hacking operations to defendants, and purchased technology from surveillance vendors.
"Potentially responsive records were identified during the search," a response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request I sent about a specific hacking tool contract says. "However, we were advised that they were not in their expected locations. An additional search for the missing records also met with unsuccessful results. Since we were unable to review the records, we were unable to determine if they were responsive to your request." In other words, the FBI says it identified related records, then couldn't actually find them when it went looking.
"Potentially responsive records were identified during the search," a response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request I sent about a specific hacking tool contract says. "However, we were advised that they were not in their expected locations. An additional search for the missing records also met with unsuccessful results. Since we were unable to review the records, we were unable to determine if they were responsive to your request." In other words, the FBI says it identified related records, then couldn't actually find them when it went looking.
The Agency (Score:5, Insightful)
For a profession intelligence and law enforcement agency the FBI sure does lose a lot of stuff.
It is almost like they lie and don't comply with records laws..
Re: (Score:1)
It's probably in the records, they just couldn't find in a timely manner. Somebody probably indexed it under the wrong category(s).
With enough people and time they can probably find it, but I believe FOIA specifies "reasonable efforts" be devoted to answering. If it's inadvertently categorized into a black hole, it may not be "reasonable" to hunt it down.
In CA, some state departments charge the requester past a certain amount of time and resource
Yep. (Score:2)
The news highlights the secrecy the FBI maintains around its use of hacking tools.
Nah, it highlights the FBI's communications strategy.
Re: (Score:2)
They follow the example set by their boss.
Conspiracy fuel (Score:1, Insightful)
Oh great, whenever the FBI f#cks up, conspiracies pour forward. Hanlon's razor is usually the right answer because it's a big sprawling organization ran by humans. However, too many are addicted to conspiracy such that they won't get a break.
Re: (Score:2)
You are right. The FBI has proven itself to be an honest and forthright institution. Now they will be subject to ridicule and their embarrassing audit failures might be made public! It might be safe to assume malice if the FBI were ever proven to have become politicized.
Re: (Score:2)
> The FBI has proven itself to be an honest and forthright institution.
I assume that's sarcasm. Sure, they have bad apples like any large org, but I haven't seen any reliable evidence of large-scale plot to be dishonest or partisan in the last few decades.
Strong claims require strong evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
"Come on man" this isn't like misplacing some stuff from the 60s or something. We live in the era of digital record keeping.
In this case. Hundreds of thousands of dollars in purchases and NOTHING? where are the POs, nobody closes them out? So We are to believe someone authorized a payment for software. The FBI took deliver, and there is no ERP entry that sows Agent such and such acknowledged receipt? Nobody can ask Agent such and such what he did with software after receiving it?
If he put it on the depar
Re: (Score:1)
Please see this hypothetical question. [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, no; they do not get the benefit of doubt.
They are a huge federal agency, funded by public funds. They have a legal obligation to account for their actions. Any discrepancy is to be thought of as malicious first and only, unless proven otherwise.
Re: (Score:1)
Suppose for the sake of argument they just can't find the records. How long do you expect them to continue? $100k in labor? 1m in labor? 10mil in labor? 100mil in labor? 1b in labor?
Where is your "give up" point? I personally don't want my tax money spent chasing relatively trivial long-shots.
Sure, I agree they should try to shore up their systems to avoid it happening again.
You would think that the NSA (Score:2)
Sprawl (Score:2)
The FBI paid ... (Score:2)
Broken Arrow (Score:2)
In about 20 years we will call this a cyberweapon broken arrow event.
Hanlon's Razor (Score:2)
While it certainly seems convenient that the FBI would "lose" this particular document, it's also incredibly plausible that they actually did lose it.
They didn't deny the existence of the contract... they even admitted that these were probably the correct things needed to satisfy the FOI request. They just couldn't find the contract itself. That's not terribly surprising. There are good reasons why government bodies routinely fail audits.
Keep the tinfoil hat on... but let your scalp breathe a little.
The Department of Redundancies Department (Score:2)
The FBI Can't Find 'Missing' Records of Its Hacking Tools.
If the records are missing, then they can't find them; and if they can't find them, then the records are missing.
then you must AQUIT any case that used them! (Score:2)
then you must AQUIT any case that used them!