MD5 compromis ?

Eric Razny

20/08/2004 à 09:31

"Michel Arboi" a écrit

Accessoirement si tu tiens à ta clef privée je te conseille fortement de
signer le hashé d'un message que je te propose et non pas le message lui
même.

<souvenirs brumeux>
Il n'existe pas des fonctions de reformatage des données qui contrent
ces attaques, justement ?
Fonctions qui ne sont pas un hash...
</souvenirs brumeux>

A partir du moment ou tu ne signe pas les données elles mêmes tu es ok[1].
La signature RSA et ses problèmes potentiels doivent se retrouver dans tout
bon livre de crypto qui parle de RSA.

Eric

[1] Enfin presque : attention tout de même au traitement ; mal fait il peut
permettre à l'attaquant de créer M' tel que ton traitement de M' donne M qui
est précisement le message qu'il veut te voir signer :)

--
L'invulnérable :
Je ne pense pas etre piratable, infectable par un trojen oui!
Vu sur fcs un jour de mars 2004.

pornin

20/08/2004 à 09:56

According to Paul Gaborit <Paul.Gaborit+:

À supposer que SHA-1 "tombe" comme vient de le faire MD5, que penser d'une
double signature (en attendant mieux) ? Par exemple, serait-il possible de
créer deux fichiers ayant *à* *la* *fois* les mêmes signatures MD5 et SHA-1 ?

Ça a déjà été analysé, et globalement ça n'apporte pas grand-chose de
faire ça. Détails :

On suppose qu'on a une attaque en 2^80 sur SHA-1 : c'est l'attaque
générique, qui consiste à prendre 2^80 messages distincts ; les simples
probabilités (soi-disant "paradoxe des anniversaires", tout ça...) nous
disent qu'on a de bonnes chances d'avoir une collision là-dedans.

On suppose qu'on a une attaque sur MD5 en temps T, où T est très petit
devant 2^80, et où l'attaque est applicable quelle que soit la valeur
de l'IV (c'est exactement la situation actuelle).

On commence par produire une collision de deux blocs, X_0 et Y_0, en
temps T. Ensuite on construit une collision X_1, Y_1 en utilisant la
sortie du MD5(X_0) = MD5(Y_0) comme IV. Comme MD5 est un système qui
marche par emboîtement de calculs sur les blocs, ça nous donne une
collision quadruple :
MD5(X_0 || X_1) = MD5(Y_0 || X_1) = MD5(X_0 || Y_1) = MD5(Y_0 || Y_1)
(le padding complique un peu ça mais c'est gérable -- faites-moi
confiance sur ce point.)

On continue ainsi avec X_2, Y_2, puis X_3, Y_3, etc.. jusqu'à X_79,
Y_79. À chaque fois, ça double le nombre de combinaisons. On obtient
ainsi, en 80*T itérations (c'est-à-dire un peu plus de trois jours avec
l'attaque actuelle), de quoi fabriquer 2^80 messages qui ont tous le
même MD5. On n'a plus qu'à appliquer l'attaque générique sur SHA-1.
Comme les messages sont construits de façon arborescente, on peut même
optimiser pas mal, en ce sens qu'on n'aura à faire qu'environ 2^82
hachages de blocs de 512 bits (bien que les messages feront 80 fois 1024
bits, ou 1024 bits est la taille de chaque X_i selon l'attaque actuelle
sur MD5).

80*T est négligeable devant 2^80. Au total, la concaténation de MD5
et de SHA-1 n'est pas plus solide que le SHA-1 seul, dans l'hypothèse
où le SHA-1 est solide.

Si on suppose le SHA-1 "cassé", ça peut encore rester applicable,
suivant le type d'attaque. On a pas mal de place pour le hasard
(l'attaque actuelle sur MD5 semble permettre de choisir les blocs X_i
un peu comme on veut, et les Y_i sont alors identiques aux X_i sauf six
bits). Il est difficile d'en dire plus, parce que justement on ne sait
pas à quoi ressemblera au juste l'attaque sur SHA-1, quand (si) on la
trouve.

En résumé, je ne recommande pas ce genre de montage. On peut facilement
montrer que la concaténation des sorties de deux fonctions de hachage
est au moins aussi solide que la plus solide des deux fonctions ; mais
il est très difficile de montrer que le résultat apporte un réel gain.
Comme on le voit ci-dessus, si l'une des deux fonctions est MD5, le
gain est nul si l'autre fonction est solide.

--Thomas Pornin

PS : ce que j'ai exposé ci-dessus n'est pas de moi, mais je ne sais plus
qui a eu cette idée en premier.

According to Paul Gaborit <Paul.Gaborit+news@enstimac.fr>:

À supposer que SHA-1 "tombe" comme vient de le faire MD5, que penser d'une
double signature (en attendant mieux) ? Par exemple, serait-il possible de
créer deux fichiers ayant *à* *la* *fois* les mêmes signatures MD5 et SHA-1 ?

Ça a déjà été analysé, et globalement ça n'apporte pas grand-chose de
faire ça. Détails :

On suppose qu'on a une attaque en 2^80 sur SHA-1 : c'est l'attaque
générique, qui consiste à prendre 2^80 messages distincts ; les simples
probabilités (soi-disant "paradoxe des anniversaires", tout ça...) nous
disent qu'on a de bonnes chances d'avoir une collision là-dedans.

On suppose qu'on a une attaque sur MD5 en temps T, où T est très petit
devant 2^80, et où l'attaque est applicable quelle que soit la valeur
de l'IV (c'est exactement la situation actuelle).

On commence par produire une collision de deux blocs, X_0 et Y_0, en
temps T. Ensuite on construit une collision X_1, Y_1 en utilisant la
sortie du MD5(X_0) = MD5(Y_0) comme IV. Comme MD5 est un système qui
marche par emboîtement de calculs sur les blocs, ça nous donne une
collision quadruple :
MD5(X_0 || X_1) = MD5(Y_0 || X_1) = MD5(X_0 || Y_1) = MD5(Y_0 || Y_1)
(le padding complique un peu ça mais c'est gérable -- faites-moi
confiance sur ce point.)

On continue ainsi avec X_2, Y_2, puis X_3, Y_3, etc.. jusqu'à X_79,
Y_79. À chaque fois, ça double le nombre de combinaisons. On obtient
ainsi, en 80*T itérations (c'est-à-dire un peu plus de trois jours avec
l'attaque actuelle), de quoi fabriquer 2^80 messages qui ont tous le
même MD5. On n'a plus qu'à appliquer l'attaque générique sur SHA-1.
Comme les messages sont construits de façon arborescente, on peut même
optimiser pas mal, en ce sens qu'on n'aura à faire qu'environ 2^82
hachages de blocs de 512 bits (bien que les messages feront 80 fois 1024
bits, ou 1024 bits est la taille de chaque X_i selon l'attaque actuelle
sur MD5).

80*T est négligeable devant 2^80. Au total, la concaténation de MD5
et de SHA-1 n'est pas plus solide que le SHA-1 seul, dans l'hypothèse
où le SHA-1 est solide.

Si on suppose le SHA-1 "cassé", ça peut encore rester applicable,
suivant le type d'attaque. On a pas mal de place pour le hasard
(l'attaque actuelle sur MD5 semble permettre de choisir les blocs X_i
un peu comme on veut, et les Y_i sont alors identiques aux X_i sauf six
bits). Il est difficile d'en dire plus, parce que justement on ne sait
pas à quoi ressemblera au juste l'attaque sur SHA-1, quand (si) on la
trouve.

En résumé, je ne recommande pas ce genre de montage. On peut facilement
montrer que la concaténation des sorties de deux fonctions de hachage
est au moins aussi solide que la plus solide des deux fonctions ; mais
il est très difficile de montrer que le résultat apporte un réel gain.
Comme on le voit ci-dessus, si l'une des deux fonctions est MD5, le
gain est nul si l'autre fonction est solide.

--Thomas Pornin

PS : ce que j'ai exposé ci-dessus n'est pas de moi, mais je ne sais plus
qui a eu cette idée en premier.

Vous avez filtré cet utilisateur ! Consultez son message

According to Paul Gaborit <Paul.Gaborit+:

À supposer que SHA-1 "tombe" comme vient de le faire MD5, que penser d'une
double signature (en attendant mieux) ? Par exemple, serait-il possible de
créer deux fichiers ayant *à* *la* *fois* les mêmes signatures MD5 et SHA-1 ?

Ça a déjà été analysé, et globalement ça n'apporte pas grand-chose de
faire ça. Détails :

On suppose qu'on a une attaque en 2^80 sur SHA-1 : c'est l'attaque
générique, qui consiste à prendre 2^80 messages distincts ; les simples
probabilités (soi-disant "paradoxe des anniversaires", tout ça...) nous
disent qu'on a de bonnes chances d'avoir une collision là-dedans.

On suppose qu'on a une attaque sur MD5 en temps T, où T est très petit
devant 2^80, et où l'attaque est applicable quelle que soit la valeur
de l'IV (c'est exactement la situation actuelle).

On commence par produire une collision de deux blocs, X_0 et Y_0, en
temps T. Ensuite on construit une collision X_1, Y_1 en utilisant la
sortie du MD5(X_0) = MD5(Y_0) comme IV. Comme MD5 est un système qui
marche par emboîtement de calculs sur les blocs, ça nous donne une
collision quadruple :
MD5(X_0 || X_1) = MD5(Y_0 || X_1) = MD5(X_0 || Y_1) = MD5(Y_0 || Y_1)
(le padding complique un peu ça mais c'est gérable -- faites-moi
confiance sur ce point.)

On continue ainsi avec X_2, Y_2, puis X_3, Y_3, etc.. jusqu'à X_79,
Y_79. À chaque fois, ça double le nombre de combinaisons. On obtient
ainsi, en 80*T itérations (c'est-à-dire un peu plus de trois jours avec
l'attaque actuelle), de quoi fabriquer 2^80 messages qui ont tous le
même MD5. On n'a plus qu'à appliquer l'attaque générique sur SHA-1.
Comme les messages sont construits de façon arborescente, on peut même
optimiser pas mal, en ce sens qu'on n'aura à faire qu'environ 2^82
hachages de blocs de 512 bits (bien que les messages feront 80 fois 1024
bits, ou 1024 bits est la taille de chaque X_i selon l'attaque actuelle
sur MD5).

80*T est négligeable devant 2^80. Au total, la concaténation de MD5
et de SHA-1 n'est pas plus solide que le SHA-1 seul, dans l'hypothèse
où le SHA-1 est solide.

Si on suppose le SHA-1 "cassé", ça peut encore rester applicable,
suivant le type d'attaque. On a pas mal de place pour le hasard
(l'attaque actuelle sur MD5 semble permettre de choisir les blocs X_i
un peu comme on veut, et les Y_i sont alors identiques aux X_i sauf six
bits). Il est difficile d'en dire plus, parce que justement on ne sait
pas à quoi ressemblera au juste l'attaque sur SHA-1, quand (si) on la
trouve.

En résumé, je ne recommande pas ce genre de montage. On peut facilement
montrer que la concaténation des sorties de deux fonctions de hachage
est au moins aussi solide que la plus solide des deux fonctions ; mais
il est très difficile de montrer que le résultat apporte un réel gain.
Comme on le voit ci-dessus, si l'une des deux fonctions est MD5, le
gain est nul si l'autre fonction est solide.

--Thomas Pornin

PS : ce que j'ai exposé ci-dessus n'est pas de moi, mais je ne sais plus
qui a eu cette idée en premier.

Paul Gaborit

20/08/2004 à 11:38

À (at) Fri, 20 Aug 2004 07:56:12 +0000 (UTC),
(Thomas Pornin) écrivait (wrote):

On peut facilement montrer que la concaténation des sorties de deux
fonctions de hachage est au moins aussi solide que la plus solide des deux
fonctions ; mais il est très difficile de montrer que le résultat apporte un
réel gain. Comme on le voit ci-dessus, si l'une des deux fonctions est MD5,
le gain est nul si l'autre fonction est solide.

Merci pour ces explications toujours aussi éclairantes.

En fait, je me posais la question car nous utilisons depuis plus de 5 ans
maitenant un petit outil maison de détection de modifications de fichiers qui
se basent entre autres sur des empreintes MD5 (une sorte de 'tripwire'
maison). Il est maintenant urgent pour nous de migrer vers SHA-1 et vos
explications me confortent dans l'idée qu'il est inutile de conserver MD5 en
parallèle (si ce n'est le temps de la migration).

La seule chose qui m'embête encore pour migrer vers SHA-1 (outre le recalcul
de toutes les empreintes), c'est que le MD5 nous permettait de vérifier notre
propre base d'empreintes en la comparant à celle fournie par Sun pour Solaris
(leur base utilise aussi MD5). J'attends de savoir quelle nouvelle fonction de
hachage ils vont utiliser...

--
Paul Gaborit - <http://www.enstimac.fr/~gaborit/>

Emmanuel Florac

20/08/2004 à 12:10

Le Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:10:01 +0000, Xavier Henner a écrit :

Avec un MD5 troué, ce 2e usage a un peu de plomb dans l'aile. Le premier
reste d'actualité, une collision accidentelle de MD5 étant en pratique
impossible. Si ca se confirme, il faudra soit signer autrement, soit
utiliser autre chose comme algo de hashage.

On peut signer le fichier à télécahrger et pas le md5, non?

--
Quis, quid, ubi, quibus auxiliis, cur, quomodo, quando

Xavier Henner

20/08/2004 à 15:13

Avec un MD5 troué, ce 2e usage a un peu de plomb dans l'aile. Le premier
reste d'actualité, une collision accidentelle de MD5 étant en pratique
impossible. Si ca se confirme, il faudra soit signer autrement, soit
utiliser autre chose comme algo de hashage.

On peut signer le fichier à télécahrger et pas le md5, non?

Bon, j'espere que je ne dis pas trop de betises dans le post qui suit,
n'hésitez pas a m'insulter dans le cas contraire.

La signature, c'est chiffrer quelque chose avec la clef privée.
Le destinataire déchiffre alors avec la clef publique, ce qui permet
de valider que c'est bien la clef privée qui avait été utilisée.

En effet, le chiffrage a clef publique/privée, c'est utiliser une
fonction secret() et une fonction publique() telles que
secret(public(x))=x=public(secret(x))
on ne puisse pas déduire secret() a partir de public()
Généralement, on chiffre avec public() et on déchiffre avec secret().
Mais 2 lignes de calcul montre que les roles sont inversables.

Seulement, utiliser la clef privée pour chiffrer quoi que ce soit est
dangeureux, car ca permet de faire une analyse avec le fichier clair et
le fichier crypté. En plus, c'est lent, les methodes de chiffre a clef
publique/clef privée n'étant pas spécialement rapides. Et si on veut
founir l'acces au clair pour les gens n'ayant pas la clef publique, il
faut télécharger les 2 fichiers de grande taille pour comparer.

Donc, on chiffre des données les plus petites possibles.
D'ou l'interet des hash de sécurité.

Soit un fichier dont le contenu est X

soit une fonction hash(X) telle qu'il soit impossible ou au moins tres
dur de déterminer Y tel que hash(X)=hash(Y) avec X != Y. On a donc un
hash de sécurité.

La signature c'est donc signature=secret(hash(X)).

On la vérifie en calculant d'une part public(signature) et on compare a
hash(X).

Si public(secret(hash(Y))=hash(X) alors la bonne fonction secret a été
utilisée et hash(Y)=hash(X) et donc X=Y

Signer le fichier MD5SUM, c'est en gros donner secret(hash(hash(X)))
puisqu'en toute logique le hash securisé d'un hash sécurisé est un hash
sécurisé.

Il n'y a donc aucune différence entre signer n fichiers et signer la
liste des hash des n fichiers.

Sauf quand une des méthodes de hashage s'avere non sure, ce qui est le
cas de MD5 il semblerait.

Pour faire de la vérification d'intégrité lors du chargement, la
signature directe a en outre un gros défaut : il faut avoir la clef
publique pour lire une signature.

Alors que si on signe la liste de hash, l'utilisateur peut
vérifier le bon déroulement du téléchargement meme sans la clef en
question.

--
Xavier Henner

Avec un MD5 troué, ce 2e usage a un peu de plomb dans l'aile. Le premier
reste d'actualité, une collision accidentelle de MD5 étant en pratique
impossible. Si ca se confirme, il faudra soit signer autrement, soit
utiliser autre chose comme algo de hashage.

On peut signer le fichier à télécahrger et pas le md5, non?

Bon, j'espere que je ne dis pas trop de betises dans le post qui suit,
n'hésitez pas a m'insulter dans le cas contraire.

La signature, c'est chiffrer quelque chose avec la clef privée.
Le destinataire déchiffre alors avec la clef publique, ce qui permet
de valider que c'est bien la clef privée qui avait été utilisée.

En effet, le chiffrage a clef publique/privée, c'est utiliser une
fonction secret() et une fonction publique() telles que
secret(public(x))=x=public(secret(x))
on ne puisse pas déduire secret() a partir de public()
Généralement, on chiffre avec public() et on déchiffre avec secret().
Mais 2 lignes de calcul montre que les roles sont inversables.

Seulement, utiliser la clef privée pour chiffrer quoi que ce soit est
dangeureux, car ca permet de faire une analyse avec le fichier clair et
le fichier crypté. En plus, c'est lent, les methodes de chiffre a clef
publique/clef privée n'étant pas spécialement rapides. Et si on veut
founir l'acces au clair pour les gens n'ayant pas la clef publique, il
faut télécharger les 2 fichiers de grande taille pour comparer.

Donc, on chiffre des données les plus petites possibles.
D'ou l'interet des hash de sécurité.

Soit un fichier dont le contenu est X

soit une fonction hash(X) telle qu'il soit impossible ou au moins tres
dur de déterminer Y tel que hash(X)=hash(Y) avec X != Y. On a donc un
hash de sécurité.

La signature c'est donc signature=secret(hash(X)).

On la vérifie en calculant d'une part public(signature) et on compare a
hash(X).

Si public(secret(hash(Y))=hash(X) alors la bonne fonction secret a été
utilisée et hash(Y)=hash(X) et donc X=Y

Signer le fichier MD5SUM, c'est en gros donner secret(hash(hash(X)))
puisqu'en toute logique le hash securisé d'un hash sécurisé est un hash
sécurisé.

Il n'y a donc aucune différence entre signer n fichiers et signer la
liste des hash des n fichiers.

Sauf quand une des méthodes de hashage s'avere non sure, ce qui est le
cas de MD5 il semblerait.

Pour faire de la vérification d'intégrité lors du chargement, la
signature directe a en outre un gros défaut : il faut avoir la clef
publique pour lire une signature.

Alors que si on signe la liste de hash, l'utilisateur peut
vérifier le bon déroulement du téléchargement meme sans la clef en
question.

--
Xavier Henner

Vous avez filtré cet utilisateur ! Consultez son message

Avec un MD5 troué, ce 2e usage a un peu de plomb dans l'aile. Le premier
reste d'actualité, une collision accidentelle de MD5 étant en pratique
impossible. Si ca se confirme, il faudra soit signer autrement, soit
utiliser autre chose comme algo de hashage.

On peut signer le fichier à télécahrger et pas le md5, non?

Bon, j'espere que je ne dis pas trop de betises dans le post qui suit,
n'hésitez pas a m'insulter dans le cas contraire.

La signature, c'est chiffrer quelque chose avec la clef privée.
Le destinataire déchiffre alors avec la clef publique, ce qui permet
de valider que c'est bien la clef privée qui avait été utilisée.

En effet, le chiffrage a clef publique/privée, c'est utiliser une
fonction secret() et une fonction publique() telles que
secret(public(x))=x=public(secret(x))
on ne puisse pas déduire secret() a partir de public()
Généralement, on chiffre avec public() et on déchiffre avec secret().
Mais 2 lignes de calcul montre que les roles sont inversables.

Seulement, utiliser la clef privée pour chiffrer quoi que ce soit est
dangeureux, car ca permet de faire une analyse avec le fichier clair et
le fichier crypté. En plus, c'est lent, les methodes de chiffre a clef
publique/clef privée n'étant pas spécialement rapides. Et si on veut
founir l'acces au clair pour les gens n'ayant pas la clef publique, il
faut télécharger les 2 fichiers de grande taille pour comparer.

Donc, on chiffre des données les plus petites possibles.
D'ou l'interet des hash de sécurité.

Soit un fichier dont le contenu est X

soit une fonction hash(X) telle qu'il soit impossible ou au moins tres
dur de déterminer Y tel que hash(X)=hash(Y) avec X != Y. On a donc un
hash de sécurité.

La signature c'est donc signature=secret(hash(X)).

On la vérifie en calculant d'une part public(signature) et on compare a
hash(X).

Si public(secret(hash(Y))=hash(X) alors la bonne fonction secret a été
utilisée et hash(Y)=hash(X) et donc X=Y

Signer le fichier MD5SUM, c'est en gros donner secret(hash(hash(X)))
puisqu'en toute logique le hash securisé d'un hash sécurisé est un hash
sécurisé.

Il n'y a donc aucune différence entre signer n fichiers et signer la
liste des hash des n fichiers.

Sauf quand une des méthodes de hashage s'avere non sure, ce qui est le
cas de MD5 il semblerait.

Pour faire de la vérification d'intégrité lors du chargement, la
signature directe a en outre un gros défaut : il faut avoir la clef
publique pour lire une signature.

Alors que si on signe la liste de hash, l'utilisateur peut
vérifier le bon déroulement du téléchargement meme sans la clef en
question.

--
Xavier Henner

Francois Grieu

23/08/2004 à 08:56

Jean-Marc Desperrier dit:

L'attaque dévoilée casse RIPEMD-128, bien que ce soit pas encore
très clair avec quelle difficulté.

L'ataque [1] s'applique à RIPEMD, mais (je crois) pas à RIPEMD-128.
RIPEMD-128 [2] est un peu à RIPEMD ce que SHA-1 est à SHA(-0):
une rotation est ajoutée spécifiquement pour contrer les attaques
sur les bit de poids fort.

Il ne me semble pas que RIPEMD-128 et a fortiori RIPEMD-160 soient
immédiatement menacés.

François Grieu

[1] Xiaoyun Wang, Dengguo Feng, Xuejia Lai et Hongbo Yu:
Collisions for Hash Functions MD4, MD5, HAVAL-128 and RIPEMD
<http://eprint.iacr.org/2004/199>

[2] H. Dobbertin, A. Bosselaers, B. Preneel
RIPEMD-160, a strengthened version of RIPEMD
<http://www.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/~bosselae/ripemd160.html>

Jean-Marc Desperrier

23/08/2004 à 10:10

Francois Grieu wrote:

Jean-Marc Desperrier dit:
L'attaque dévoilée casse RIPEMD-128, bien que ce soit pas encore
très clair avec quelle difficulté.

L'ataque [1] s'applique à RIPEMD, mais (je crois) pas à RIPEMD-128.
RIPEMD-128 [2] est un peu à RIPEMD ce que SHA-1 est à SHA(-0):
une rotation est ajoutée spécifiquement pour contrer les attaques
sur les bit de poids fort.

Mea Culpa, je ne connaissais pas du tout la distinction entre RIPEMD et
RIPEMD-128, quand j'ai vu la taille de la sortie, je me suis dit "ils
ont oublié le -128" sans aller chercher plus loin.

Francois Grieu

23/08/2004 à 11:32

Jean-Marc Desperrier wrote:

Je ne connaissais pas du tout la distinction entre RIPEMD et
RIPEMD-128, quand j'ai vu la taille de la sortie, je me suis dit
"ils ont oublié le -128" sans aller chercher plus loin.

J'ai initialement fait la même lecture erronée; on n'est pas les seuls.

En fait, il semble bien que les deux fonctions de hashage admises
par la DCSSI [*] et autres "autorités officielles" ne sont pas
(directement au moins) inquiétées par la nouvelle attaque, dont le
principe directeur n'est pas tout à fait neuf.

François Grieu

[*] voir
<http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/site_documents/certification/SIG-P-01_Certif_de_conformite_des_DCS_elec.pdf>
qui recommande
<http://webapp.etsi.org/workprogram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_ID277>
lequel ne recommande que SHA-1 et RIPEMD-160

remy

23/08/2004 à 17:50

"Grindipo" a écrit dans le message de news:
cg1jf2$jfq$

Et bien non, les conséquences sont au contraire catastrophiques.
En effet, les algorithmes de hachage sont massivement utilisés dans les
mécanismes de signatures.
C'est la fin programmée, au moins pour quelques années, du
commerce électronique.
tout dou

fait un hachage dans un sen "1 octee -> dernnier octee
et fait en un autre "du dernier -> le premmier"
ou lit ton fichier dans le deux sen comme tu veut

cela va regle le pb a mon avi
inconvenient il y a deux signatures mais bon

a+ remy

Bon ok. Quelle que soit l'importance de l'attaque faite sur md5, il est
désormais non fiable. Mais puisque depuis 10 ans on conseille de ne plus
l'utiliser, quelle est actuellement la fonction de hash la plus sûre ? Sur
quels critères ?
Tant qu'à changer mes habitudes, autant en prendre de bonnes !
J'avoue être un peu perdu avec toutes les nouvelles infos.

Je propose Xpost et fu2 fmc.

Grindipo

HK

14/09/2004 à 12:26

Windows on The White House & Karl Rove's Murder Inc. , See the tremendous
interest of Our Government agency's encrypted log access files...

PROPOSAL to Franchise Karl Rove's White House Murder Inc... NASDAQ's IPO...
*****************************************************************

http://www.outsupport.org/forum/viewtopic/985.html

http://forum.shrc.org/english/bb/Fo...TML/000030.html

http://www.fpa.org/thread_msg2597/t...TML/000194.html

***Special CONFIRMED Report. ****Assassins; who put Al-Qaeda to Shame.
The Number three most powerful man , after Dick Cheney & G.W. BUSH .

ALL Ariel Sharon's servants , Thugs & Murderers.

Karl ROVE & Ariel Sharon banking on their Syrian killers & Murderers &
Special Syrian Assassins of Assef Shawkat & Roustom Ghazali Working for
Sharon and the Worst NEOCONS.

Special I.C.C. Investigation; The Hague NL. & Belgium .Etc. Etc.....
****************************************************

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Specia...2104madsen.html [ Disabled by Karl
Rove's Thugs & Killers.]@CIA.GOV.....& the republican Rags....
***********************************************************

Karl Rove's White House " Murder, Inc."

By Wayne Madsen .
Online Journal Contributing Writer .

SEP, 2004- On September 15, 2001, just four days after the 9-11 attacks,
CIA Director George Tenet provided President [sic] Bush with a Top Secret
"Worldwide Attack Matrix"-a virtual license to kill targets deemed to be a
threat to the United States in some 80 countries around the world. The Tenet
plan, which was subsequently approved by Bush, essentially reversed the
executive orders of four previous U.S. administrations that expressly
prohibited political assassinations.

According to high level European intelligence officials, Bush's counselor,
Karl Rove, used the new presidential authority to silence a popular Lebanese
Christian politician who was planning to offer irrefutable evidence that
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon authorized the massacre of hundreds of
Palestinian men, women, and children in the Beirut refugee camps of Sabra
and Shatilla in 1982. In addition, Sharon provided the Lebanese forces who
carried out the grisly task. At the time of the massacres, Elie Hobeika was
intelligence chief of Lebanese Christian forces in Lebanon who were battling
Palestinians and other Muslim groups in a bloody civil war. He was also the
chief liaison to Israeli Defense Force (IDF) personnel in Lebanon. An
official Israeli inquiry into the massacre at the camps, the Kahan
Commission, merely found Sharon "indirectly" responsible for the slaughter
and fingered Hobeika as the chief instigator.

The Kahan Commission never called on Hobeika to offer testimony in his
defense. However, in response to charges brought against Sharon before a
special war crimes court in Belgium, Hobeika was urged to testify against
Sharon, according to well-informed Lebanese sources. Hobeika was prepared to
offer a different version of events than what was contained in the Kahan
report. A 1993 Belgian law permitting human rights prosecutions was unusual
in that non-Belgians could be tried for violations against other
non-Belgians in a Belgian court. Under pressure from the Bush
administration, the law was severely amended and the extra territoriality
provisions were curtailed.

Hobeika headed the Lebanese forces intelligence agency since the mid- 1970s
and he soon developed close ties to the CIA. He was a frequent visitor to
the CIA's headquarters at Langley, Virginia. After the Syrian invasion of
Lebanon in 1990, Hobeika held a number of cabinet positions in the Lebanese
government, a proxy for the Syrian occupation authorities. He also served in
the parliament. In July 2001, Hobeika called a press conference and
announced he was prepared to testify against Sharon in Belgium and revealed
that he had evidence of what actually occurred in Sabra and Shatilla.
Hobeika also indicated that Israel had flown members of the South Lebanon
Army (SLA) into Beirut International Airport in an Israeli Air Force C130
transport plane. In full view of dozens of witnesses, including members of
the Lebanese army and others, SLA troops under the command of Major Saad
Haddad were slipped into the camps to commit the massacres. The SLA troops
were under the direct command of Ariel Sharon and an Israeli Mossad agent
provocateur named Rafi Eitan. Hobeika offered evidence that a former U.S.
ambassador to Lebanon was aware of the Israeli plot. In addition, the IDF
had placed a camera in a strategic position to film the Sabra and Shatilla
massacres. Hobeika was going to ask that the footage be released as part of
the investigation of Sharon.

After announcing he was willing to testify against Sharon, Hobeika became
fearful for his safety and began moves to leave Lebanon. Hobeika was not
aware that his threats to testify against Sharon had triggered a series of
fateful events that reached well into the White House and Sharon's office.

On January 24, 2002, Hobeika's car was blown up by a remote controlled bomb
placed in a parked Mercedes along a street in the Hazmieh section of Beirut.
The bomb exploded when Hobeika and his three associates, Fares Souweidan,
Mitri Ajram, and Waleed Zein, were driving their Range Rover past the
TNT-laden Mercedes at 9:40 am Beirut time. The Range Rover's four passengers
were killed in the explosion. In case Hobeika's car had taken another route

through the neighborhood, two additional parked cars, located at two other
choke points, were also rigged with TNT. The powerful bomb wounded a number
of other people on the street. Other parked cars were destroyed and
buildings and homes were damaged. The Lebanese president, prime minister,
and interior minister all claimed that Israeli agents were behind the
attack.

It is noteworthy that the State Department's list of global terrorist
incidents for 2002 worldwide failed to list the car bombing attack on
Hobeika and his party. The White House wanted to ensure the attack was
censored from the report. The reason was simple: the attack ultimately had
Washington's fingerprints on it.

High level European intelligence sources now report that Karl Rove
personally coordinated Hobeika's assassination. The hit on Hobeika employed
Syrian intelligence agents. Syrian President Bashar Assad was trying to
curry favor with the Bush administration in the aftermath of 9-11 and was
more than willing to help the White House. In addition, Assad's father,
Hafez Assad, had been an ally of Bush's father during Desert Storm, a period
that saw Washington give a "wink and a nod" to Syria's occupation of
Lebanon. Rove wanted to help Sharon avoid any political embarrassment from
an in absentia trial in Brussels where Hobeika would be a star witness. Rove
and Sharon agreed on the plan to use Syrian Military Intelligence agents to
assassinate Hobeika. Rove saw Sharon as an indispensable ally of Bush in
ensuring the loyalty of the Christian evangelical and Jewish voting blocs in
the United States. Sharon saw the plan to have the United States coordinate
the hit as a way to mask all connections to Jerusalem.

The Syrian hit team was ordered by Assef Shawkat, the number two man in
Syrian military intelligence and a good friend and brother in law of Syrian
President Bashar Assad. Assad's intelligence services had already cooperated
with U.S. intelligence in resorting to unconventional methods to extract
information from al Qaeda detainees deported to Syria from the United States
and other countries in the wake of 9-11. The order to take out Hobeika was
transmitted by Shawkat to Roustom Ghazali, the head of Syrian military
intelligence in Beirut. Ghazali arranged for the three remote controlled
cars to be parked along Hobeika's route in Hazmieh; only few hundred yards
from the Barracks of Syrian Special Forces which are stationed in the area
near the Presidential palace , the ministry of Defense and various
Government and officers quarters . This particular area is covered 24/7 by a
very sophisticated USA multi-agency surveillance system to monitor Syrian
and Lebanese security activities and is a " Choice " area to live in for its
perceived high security .... [Courtesy of the Special Collections Services.]
... SCS... ; CIA & NSA & DIA....

The plan to kill Hobeika had all the necessary caveats and built-in denial
mechanisms. If the Syrians were discovered beforehand or afterwards, Karl
Rove and his associates in the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans would be
ensured plausible deniability.

Hobeika's CIA intermediary in Beirut, a man only referred to as "Jason" by
Hobeika, was a frequent companion of the Lebanese politician during official
and off-duty hours. During Hobeika's election campaigns for his
parliamentary seat, Jason was often in Hobeika's office offering support and
advice. After Hobeika's assassination, Jason became despondent over the
death of his colleague. Eventually, Jason disappeared abruptly from Lebanon
and reportedly later emerged in Pakistan.

Karl Rove's involvement in the assassination of Hobeika may not have been
the last "hit" he ordered to help out Sharon. In March 2002, a few months
after Hobeika's assassination, another Lebanese Christian with knowledge of
Sharon's involvement in the Sabra and Shatilla massacres was gunned down
along with his wife in Sao Paulo, Brazil. A bullet fired at Michael Nassar's
car flattened one of his tires. Nassar pulled into a gasoline station for
repairs. A professional assassin, firing a gun with a silencer, shot Nassar
and his wife in the head, killing them both instantly. The assailant fled
and was never captured. Nassar was also involved with the Phalange militia
at Sabra and Shatilla. Nassar was also reportedly willing to testify against
Sharon in Belgium and, as a nephew of SLA Commander General Antoine Lahd,
may have had important evidence to bolster Hobeika's charge that Sharon
ordered SLA forces into the camps to wipe out the Palestinians.

Based on what European intelligence claims is concrete intelligence on
Rove's involvement in the assassination of Hobeika, the Bush administration
can now add political assassination to its laundry list of other misdeeds,
from lying about the reasons to go to war to the torture tactics in
violation of the Geneva Conventions that have been employed by the Pentagon
and "third country" nationals at prisons in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay.

Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and
columnist. He served in the National Security Agency (NSA) during the Reagan
administration and wrote the introduction to Forbidden Truth. He is the
co-author, with John Stanton, of "America's Nightmare: The Presidency of
George Bush II." His forthcoming book is titled: "Jaded Tasks: Big Oil,
Black Ops, and Brass Plates." Madsen can be reached at:

This is some of the evidence for you and for the World ....
*********************************************

~~~encrypted/logs/access ~~~

Not to mention hundreds of private companies and governments. Anyway...
*********************************************************

Lines 10-36
of my logfiles show a lot of interest in this article:

# grep sid52 /encrypted/logs/access_log|awk '{print $1,$7}'|sed -n
'10,36p'

spb-213-33-248-190.sovintel.ru /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
ext1.shape.nato.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
server1.namsa.nato.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
ns1.saclantc.nato.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
bxlproxyb.europarl.eu.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
wdcsun18.usdoj.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
wdcsun21.usdoj.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
tcs-gateway11.treas.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
tcs-gateway13.treas.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
relay1.ucia.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
relay2.cia.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
relay2.ucia.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
n021.dhs.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
legion.dera.gov.uk /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gateway-fincen.uscg.mil /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
crawler2.googlebot.com /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
crawler1.googlebot.com /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gateway101.gsi.gov.uk /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gate11-quantico.nmci.usmc.mil /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gate13-quantico.nmci.usmc.mil /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
fw1-a.osis.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
crawler13.googlebot.com /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
fw1-b.osis.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
bouncer.nics.gov.uk /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
beluha.ssu.gov.ua /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
zukprxpro02.zreo.compaq.com
/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52....

To be continued ....For Decades.!!!!!

HOLLYWOOD FL.... ATTA & Aris2F...Dis...ney...
DENVER CO...
ART STUDENTS...
MOVERS-
Lakam & Mr.X. MEGA....Feith, woolfowitz...Perle, Maaloof, etc.
OSP, SCS, DIA, M.I. etc....
Etc. Etc.

Windows on The White House & Karl Rove's Murder Inc. , See the tremendous
interest of Our Government agency's encrypted log access files...

PROPOSAL to Franchise Karl Rove's White House Murder Inc... NASDAQ's IPO...
*****************************************************************

http://www.outsupport.org/forum/viewtopic/985.html

http://forum.shrc.org/english/bb/Fo...TML/000030.html

http://www.fpa.org/thread_msg2597/t...TML/000194.html

***Special CONFIRMED Report. ****Assassins; who put Al-Qaeda to Shame.
The Number three most powerful man , after Dick Cheney & G.W. BUSH .

ALL Ariel Sharon's servants , Thugs & Murderers.

Karl ROVE & Ariel Sharon banking on their Syrian killers & Murderers &
Special Syrian Assassins of Assef Shawkat & Roustom Ghazali Working for
Sharon and the Worst NEOCONS.

Special I.C.C. Investigation; The Hague NL. & Belgium .Etc. Etc.....
****************************************************

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Specia...2104madsen.html [ Disabled by Karl
Rove's Thugs & Killers.]....@Google@CIA.GOV.....& the republican Rags....
***********************************************************

Karl Rove's White House " Murder, Inc."

By Wayne Madsen .
Online Journal Contributing Writer .

SEP, 2004- On September 15, 2001, just four days after the 9-11 attacks,
CIA Director George Tenet provided President [sic] Bush with a Top Secret
"Worldwide Attack Matrix"-a virtual license to kill targets deemed to be a
threat to the United States in some 80 countries around the world. The Tenet
plan, which was subsequently approved by Bush, essentially reversed the
executive orders of four previous U.S. administrations that expressly
prohibited political assassinations.

According to high level European intelligence officials, Bush's counselor,
Karl Rove, used the new presidential authority to silence a popular Lebanese
Christian politician who was planning to offer irrefutable evidence that
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon authorized the massacre of hundreds of
Palestinian men, women, and children in the Beirut refugee camps of Sabra
and Shatilla in 1982. In addition, Sharon provided the Lebanese forces who
carried out the grisly task. At the time of the massacres, Elie Hobeika was
intelligence chief of Lebanese Christian forces in Lebanon who were battling
Palestinians and other Muslim groups in a bloody civil war. He was also the
chief liaison to Israeli Defense Force (IDF) personnel in Lebanon. An
official Israeli inquiry into the massacre at the camps, the Kahan
Commission, merely found Sharon "indirectly" responsible for the slaughter
and fingered Hobeika as the chief instigator.

The Kahan Commission never called on Hobeika to offer testimony in his
defense. However, in response to charges brought against Sharon before a
special war crimes court in Belgium, Hobeika was urged to testify against
Sharon, according to well-informed Lebanese sources. Hobeika was prepared to
offer a different version of events than what was contained in the Kahan
report. A 1993 Belgian law permitting human rights prosecutions was unusual
in that non-Belgians could be tried for violations against other
non-Belgians in a Belgian court. Under pressure from the Bush
administration, the law was severely amended and the extra territoriality
provisions were curtailed.

Hobeika headed the Lebanese forces intelligence agency since the mid- 1970s
and he soon developed close ties to the CIA. He was a frequent visitor to
the CIA's headquarters at Langley, Virginia. After the Syrian invasion of
Lebanon in 1990, Hobeika held a number of cabinet positions in the Lebanese
government, a proxy for the Syrian occupation authorities. He also served in
the parliament. In July 2001, Hobeika called a press conference and
announced he was prepared to testify against Sharon in Belgium and revealed
that he had evidence of what actually occurred in Sabra and Shatilla.
Hobeika also indicated that Israel had flown members of the South Lebanon
Army (SLA) into Beirut International Airport in an Israeli Air Force C130
transport plane. In full view of dozens of witnesses, including members of
the Lebanese army and others, SLA troops under the command of Major Saad
Haddad were slipped into the camps to commit the massacres. The SLA troops
were under the direct command of Ariel Sharon and an Israeli Mossad agent
provocateur named Rafi Eitan. Hobeika offered evidence that a former U.S.
ambassador to Lebanon was aware of the Israeli plot. In addition, the IDF
had placed a camera in a strategic position to film the Sabra and Shatilla
massacres. Hobeika was going to ask that the footage be released as part of
the investigation of Sharon.

After announcing he was willing to testify against Sharon, Hobeika became
fearful for his safety and began moves to leave Lebanon. Hobeika was not
aware that his threats to testify against Sharon had triggered a series of
fateful events that reached well into the White House and Sharon's office.

On January 24, 2002, Hobeika's car was blown up by a remote controlled bomb
placed in a parked Mercedes along a street in the Hazmieh section of Beirut.
The bomb exploded when Hobeika and his three associates, Fares Souweidan,
Mitri Ajram, and Waleed Zein, were driving their Range Rover past the
TNT-laden Mercedes at 9:40 am Beirut time. The Range Rover's four passengers
were killed in the explosion. In case Hobeika's car had taken another route

through the neighborhood, two additional parked cars, located at two other
choke points, were also rigged with TNT. The powerful bomb wounded a number
of other people on the street. Other parked cars were destroyed and
buildings and homes were damaged. The Lebanese president, prime minister,
and interior minister all claimed that Israeli agents were behind the
attack.

It is noteworthy that the State Department's list of global terrorist
incidents for 2002 worldwide failed to list the car bombing attack on
Hobeika and his party. The White House wanted to ensure the attack was
censored from the report. The reason was simple: the attack ultimately had
Washington's fingerprints on it.

High level European intelligence sources now report that Karl Rove
personally coordinated Hobeika's assassination. The hit on Hobeika employed
Syrian intelligence agents. Syrian President Bashar Assad was trying to
curry favor with the Bush administration in the aftermath of 9-11 and was
more than willing to help the White House. In addition, Assad's father,
Hafez Assad, had been an ally of Bush's father during Desert Storm, a period
that saw Washington give a "wink and a nod" to Syria's occupation of
Lebanon. Rove wanted to help Sharon avoid any political embarrassment from
an in absentia trial in Brussels where Hobeika would be a star witness. Rove
and Sharon agreed on the plan to use Syrian Military Intelligence agents to
assassinate Hobeika. Rove saw Sharon as an indispensable ally of Bush in
ensuring the loyalty of the Christian evangelical and Jewish voting blocs in
the United States. Sharon saw the plan to have the United States coordinate
the hit as a way to mask all connections to Jerusalem.

The Syrian hit team was ordered by Assef Shawkat, the number two man in
Syrian military intelligence and a good friend and brother in law of Syrian
President Bashar Assad. Assad's intelligence services had already cooperated
with U.S. intelligence in resorting to unconventional methods to extract
information from al Qaeda detainees deported to Syria from the United States
and other countries in the wake of 9-11. The order to take out Hobeika was
transmitted by Shawkat to Roustom Ghazali, the head of Syrian military
intelligence in Beirut. Ghazali arranged for the three remote controlled
cars to be parked along Hobeika's route in Hazmieh; only few hundred yards
from the Barracks of Syrian Special Forces which are stationed in the area
near the Presidential palace , the ministry of Defense and various
Government and officers quarters . This particular area is covered 24/7 by a
very sophisticated USA multi-agency surveillance system to monitor Syrian
and Lebanese security activities and is a " Choice " area to live in for its
perceived high security .... [Courtesy of the Special Collections Services.]
... SCS... ; CIA & NSA & DIA....

The plan to kill Hobeika had all the necessary caveats and built-in denial
mechanisms. If the Syrians were discovered beforehand or afterwards, Karl
Rove and his associates in the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans would be
ensured plausible deniability.

Hobeika's CIA intermediary in Beirut, a man only referred to as "Jason" by
Hobeika, was a frequent companion of the Lebanese politician during official
and off-duty hours. During Hobeika's election campaigns for his
parliamentary seat, Jason was often in Hobeika's office offering support and
advice. After Hobeika's assassination, Jason became despondent over the
death of his colleague. Eventually, Jason disappeared abruptly from Lebanon
and reportedly later emerged in Pakistan.

Karl Rove's involvement in the assassination of Hobeika may not have been
the last "hit" he ordered to help out Sharon. In March 2002, a few months
after Hobeika's assassination, another Lebanese Christian with knowledge of
Sharon's involvement in the Sabra and Shatilla massacres was gunned down
along with his wife in Sao Paulo, Brazil. A bullet fired at Michael Nassar's
car flattened one of his tires. Nassar pulled into a gasoline station for
repairs. A professional assassin, firing a gun with a silencer, shot Nassar
and his wife in the head, killing them both instantly. The assailant fled
and was never captured. Nassar was also involved with the Phalange militia
at Sabra and Shatilla. Nassar was also reportedly willing to testify against
Sharon in Belgium and, as a nephew of SLA Commander General Antoine Lahd,
may have had important evidence to bolster Hobeika's charge that Sharon
ordered SLA forces into the camps to wipe out the Palestinians.

Based on what European intelligence claims is concrete intelligence on
Rove's involvement in the assassination of Hobeika, the Bush administration
can now add political assassination to its laundry list of other misdeeds,
from lying about the reasons to go to war to the torture tactics in
violation of the Geneva Conventions that have been employed by the Pentagon
and "third country" nationals at prisons in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay.

Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and
columnist. He served in the National Security Agency (NSA) during the Reagan
administration and wrote the introduction to Forbidden Truth. He is the
co-author, with John Stanton, of "America's Nightmare: The Presidency of
George Bush II." His forthcoming book is titled: "Jaded Tasks: Big Oil,
Black Ops, and Brass Plates." Madsen can be reached at:
WMadsen777@aol.com

This is some of the evidence for you and for the World ....
*********************************************

~~~encrypted/logs/access ~~~

Not to mention hundreds of private companies and governments. Anyway...
*********************************************************

Lines 10-36
of my logfiles show a lot of interest in this article:

# grep sid52 /encrypted/logs/access_log|awk '{print $1,$7}'|sed -n
'10,36p'

spb-213-33-248-190.sovintel.ru /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
ext1.shape.nato.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
server1.namsa.nato.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
ns1.saclantc.nato.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
bxlproxyb.europarl.eu.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
wdcsun18.usdoj.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
wdcsun21.usdoj.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
tcs-gateway11.treas.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
tcs-gateway13.treas.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
relay1.ucia.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
relay2.cia.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
relay2.ucia.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
n021.dhs.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
legion.dera.gov.uk /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gateway-fincen.uscg.mil /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
crawler2.googlebot.com /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
crawler1.googlebot.com /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gateway101.gsi.gov.uk /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gate11-quantico.nmci.usmc.mil /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gate13-quantico.nmci.usmc.mil /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
fw1-a.osis.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
crawler13.googlebot.com /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
fw1-b.osis.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
bouncer.nics.gov.uk /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
beluha.ssu.gov.ua /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
zukprxpro02.zreo.compaq.com
/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52....

To be continued ....For Decades.!!!!!

HOLLYWOOD FL.... ATTA & Aris2F...Dis...ney...
DENVER CO...
ART STUDENTS...
MOVERS- INC.@ORG.IL
Lakam & Mr.X. MEGA....Feith, woolfowitz...Perle, Maaloof, etc.
OSP, SCS, DIA, M.I. etc....
Etc. Etc.

Vous avez filtré cet utilisateur ! Consultez son message

Windows on The White House & Karl Rove's Murder Inc. , See the tremendous
interest of Our Government agency's encrypted log access files...

PROPOSAL to Franchise Karl Rove's White House Murder Inc... NASDAQ's IPO...
*****************************************************************

http://www.outsupport.org/forum/viewtopic/985.html

http://forum.shrc.org/english/bb/Fo...TML/000030.html

http://www.fpa.org/thread_msg2597/t...TML/000194.html

***Special CONFIRMED Report. ****Assassins; who put Al-Qaeda to Shame.
The Number three most powerful man , after Dick Cheney & G.W. BUSH .

ALL Ariel Sharon's servants , Thugs & Murderers.

Karl ROVE & Ariel Sharon banking on their Syrian killers & Murderers &
Special Syrian Assassins of Assef Shawkat & Roustom Ghazali Working for
Sharon and the Worst NEOCONS.

Special I.C.C. Investigation; The Hague NL. & Belgium .Etc. Etc.....
****************************************************

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Specia...2104madsen.html [ Disabled by Karl
Rove's Thugs & Killers.]@CIA.GOV.....& the republican Rags....
***********************************************************

Karl Rove's White House " Murder, Inc."

By Wayne Madsen .
Online Journal Contributing Writer .

SEP, 2004- On September 15, 2001, just four days after the 9-11 attacks,
CIA Director George Tenet provided President [sic] Bush with a Top Secret
"Worldwide Attack Matrix"-a virtual license to kill targets deemed to be a
threat to the United States in some 80 countries around the world. The Tenet
plan, which was subsequently approved by Bush, essentially reversed the
executive orders of four previous U.S. administrations that expressly
prohibited political assassinations.

According to high level European intelligence officials, Bush's counselor,
Karl Rove, used the new presidential authority to silence a popular Lebanese
Christian politician who was planning to offer irrefutable evidence that
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon authorized the massacre of hundreds of
Palestinian men, women, and children in the Beirut refugee camps of Sabra
and Shatilla in 1982. In addition, Sharon provided the Lebanese forces who
carried out the grisly task. At the time of the massacres, Elie Hobeika was
intelligence chief of Lebanese Christian forces in Lebanon who were battling
Palestinians and other Muslim groups in a bloody civil war. He was also the
chief liaison to Israeli Defense Force (IDF) personnel in Lebanon. An
official Israeli inquiry into the massacre at the camps, the Kahan
Commission, merely found Sharon "indirectly" responsible for the slaughter
and fingered Hobeika as the chief instigator.

The Kahan Commission never called on Hobeika to offer testimony in his
defense. However, in response to charges brought against Sharon before a
special war crimes court in Belgium, Hobeika was urged to testify against
Sharon, according to well-informed Lebanese sources. Hobeika was prepared to
offer a different version of events than what was contained in the Kahan
report. A 1993 Belgian law permitting human rights prosecutions was unusual
in that non-Belgians could be tried for violations against other
non-Belgians in a Belgian court. Under pressure from the Bush
administration, the law was severely amended and the extra territoriality
provisions were curtailed.

Hobeika headed the Lebanese forces intelligence agency since the mid- 1970s
and he soon developed close ties to the CIA. He was a frequent visitor to
the CIA's headquarters at Langley, Virginia. After the Syrian invasion of
Lebanon in 1990, Hobeika held a number of cabinet positions in the Lebanese
government, a proxy for the Syrian occupation authorities. He also served in
the parliament. In July 2001, Hobeika called a press conference and
announced he was prepared to testify against Sharon in Belgium and revealed
that he had evidence of what actually occurred in Sabra and Shatilla.
Hobeika also indicated that Israel had flown members of the South Lebanon
Army (SLA) into Beirut International Airport in an Israeli Air Force C130
transport plane. In full view of dozens of witnesses, including members of
the Lebanese army and others, SLA troops under the command of Major Saad
Haddad were slipped into the camps to commit the massacres. The SLA troops
were under the direct command of Ariel Sharon and an Israeli Mossad agent
provocateur named Rafi Eitan. Hobeika offered evidence that a former U.S.
ambassador to Lebanon was aware of the Israeli plot. In addition, the IDF
had placed a camera in a strategic position to film the Sabra and Shatilla
massacres. Hobeika was going to ask that the footage be released as part of
the investigation of Sharon.

After announcing he was willing to testify against Sharon, Hobeika became
fearful for his safety and began moves to leave Lebanon. Hobeika was not
aware that his threats to testify against Sharon had triggered a series of
fateful events that reached well into the White House and Sharon's office.

On January 24, 2002, Hobeika's car was blown up by a remote controlled bomb
placed in a parked Mercedes along a street in the Hazmieh section of Beirut.
The bomb exploded when Hobeika and his three associates, Fares Souweidan,
Mitri Ajram, and Waleed Zein, were driving their Range Rover past the
TNT-laden Mercedes at 9:40 am Beirut time. The Range Rover's four passengers
were killed in the explosion. In case Hobeika's car had taken another route

through the neighborhood, two additional parked cars, located at two other
choke points, were also rigged with TNT. The powerful bomb wounded a number
of other people on the street. Other parked cars were destroyed and
buildings and homes were damaged. The Lebanese president, prime minister,
and interior minister all claimed that Israeli agents were behind the
attack.

It is noteworthy that the State Department's list of global terrorist
incidents for 2002 worldwide failed to list the car bombing attack on
Hobeika and his party. The White House wanted to ensure the attack was
censored from the report. The reason was simple: the attack ultimately had
Washington's fingerprints on it.

High level European intelligence sources now report that Karl Rove
personally coordinated Hobeika's assassination. The hit on Hobeika employed
Syrian intelligence agents. Syrian President Bashar Assad was trying to
curry favor with the Bush administration in the aftermath of 9-11 and was
more than willing to help the White House. In addition, Assad's father,
Hafez Assad, had been an ally of Bush's father during Desert Storm, a period
that saw Washington give a "wink and a nod" to Syria's occupation of
Lebanon. Rove wanted to help Sharon avoid any political embarrassment from
an in absentia trial in Brussels where Hobeika would be a star witness. Rove
and Sharon agreed on the plan to use Syrian Military Intelligence agents to
assassinate Hobeika. Rove saw Sharon as an indispensable ally of Bush in
ensuring the loyalty of the Christian evangelical and Jewish voting blocs in
the United States. Sharon saw the plan to have the United States coordinate
the hit as a way to mask all connections to Jerusalem.

The Syrian hit team was ordered by Assef Shawkat, the number two man in
Syrian military intelligence and a good friend and brother in law of Syrian
President Bashar Assad. Assad's intelligence services had already cooperated
with U.S. intelligence in resorting to unconventional methods to extract
information from al Qaeda detainees deported to Syria from the United States
and other countries in the wake of 9-11. The order to take out Hobeika was
transmitted by Shawkat to Roustom Ghazali, the head of Syrian military
intelligence in Beirut. Ghazali arranged for the three remote controlled
cars to be parked along Hobeika's route in Hazmieh; only few hundred yards
from the Barracks of Syrian Special Forces which are stationed in the area
near the Presidential palace , the ministry of Defense and various
Government and officers quarters . This particular area is covered 24/7 by a
very sophisticated USA multi-agency surveillance system to monitor Syrian
and Lebanese security activities and is a " Choice " area to live in for its
perceived high security .... [Courtesy of the Special Collections Services.]
... SCS... ; CIA & NSA & DIA....

The plan to kill Hobeika had all the necessary caveats and built-in denial
mechanisms. If the Syrians were discovered beforehand or afterwards, Karl
Rove and his associates in the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans would be
ensured plausible deniability.

Hobeika's CIA intermediary in Beirut, a man only referred to as "Jason" by
Hobeika, was a frequent companion of the Lebanese politician during official
and off-duty hours. During Hobeika's election campaigns for his
parliamentary seat, Jason was often in Hobeika's office offering support and
advice. After Hobeika's assassination, Jason became despondent over the
death of his colleague. Eventually, Jason disappeared abruptly from Lebanon
and reportedly later emerged in Pakistan.

Karl Rove's involvement in the assassination of Hobeika may not have been
the last "hit" he ordered to help out Sharon. In March 2002, a few months
after Hobeika's assassination, another Lebanese Christian with knowledge of
Sharon's involvement in the Sabra and Shatilla massacres was gunned down
along with his wife in Sao Paulo, Brazil. A bullet fired at Michael Nassar's
car flattened one of his tires. Nassar pulled into a gasoline station for
repairs. A professional assassin, firing a gun with a silencer, shot Nassar
and his wife in the head, killing them both instantly. The assailant fled
and was never captured. Nassar was also involved with the Phalange militia
at Sabra and Shatilla. Nassar was also reportedly willing to testify against
Sharon in Belgium and, as a nephew of SLA Commander General Antoine Lahd,
may have had important evidence to bolster Hobeika's charge that Sharon
ordered SLA forces into the camps to wipe out the Palestinians.

Based on what European intelligence claims is concrete intelligence on
Rove's involvement in the assassination of Hobeika, the Bush administration
can now add political assassination to its laundry list of other misdeeds,
from lying about the reasons to go to war to the torture tactics in
violation of the Geneva Conventions that have been employed by the Pentagon
and "third country" nationals at prisons in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay.

Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and
columnist. He served in the National Security Agency (NSA) during the Reagan
administration and wrote the introduction to Forbidden Truth. He is the
co-author, with John Stanton, of "America's Nightmare: The Presidency of
George Bush II." His forthcoming book is titled: "Jaded Tasks: Big Oil,
Black Ops, and Brass Plates." Madsen can be reached at:

This is some of the evidence for you and for the World ....
*********************************************

~~~encrypted/logs/access ~~~

Not to mention hundreds of private companies and governments. Anyway...
*********************************************************

Lines 10-36
of my logfiles show a lot of interest in this article:

# grep sid52 /encrypted/logs/access_log|awk '{print $1,$7}'|sed -n
'10,36p'

spb-213-33-248-190.sovintel.ru /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
ext1.shape.nato.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
server1.namsa.nato.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
ns1.saclantc.nato.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
bxlproxyb.europarl.eu.int /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
wdcsun18.usdoj.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
wdcsun21.usdoj.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
tcs-gateway11.treas.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
tcs-gateway13.treas.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
relay1.ucia.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
relay2.cia.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
relay2.ucia.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
n021.dhs.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
legion.dera.gov.uk /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gateway-fincen.uscg.mil /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
crawler2.googlebot.com /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
crawler1.googlebot.com /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gateway101.gsi.gov.uk /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gate11-quantico.nmci.usmc.mil /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
gate13-quantico.nmci.usmc.mil /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
fw1-a.osis.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
crawler13.googlebot.com /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
fw1-b.osis.gov /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
bouncer.nics.gov.uk /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
beluha.ssu.gov.ua /modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52
zukprxpro02.zreo.compaq.com
/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid52....

To be continued ....For Decades.!!!!!

HOLLYWOOD FL.... ATTA & Aris2F...Dis...ney...
DENVER CO...
ART STUDENTS...
MOVERS-
Lakam & Mr.X. MEGA....Feith, woolfowitz...Perle, Maaloof, etc.
OSP, SCS, DIA, M.I. etc....
Etc. Etc.

MD5 compromis ?

10 réponses

Veuillez sélectionner un problème