
Russian Hackers Stole NSA Data on U.S. Cyber Defense - NwmG
https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-hackers-stole-nsa-data-on-u-s-cyber-defense-1507222108
======
indubitable
I find these allegations are deserving of some scrutiny. The entire story is
quite bizarre when you begin to consider it. The NSA is apparently leaking
like a broken pipe with this information. And it's peculiar because this is
information that makes our intelligence agencies look completely inept. That
is a very good thing if this story is fake, but a very bad thing if its true.

It is stupefying that NSA contractors/employees would be genuinely copying
classified information that is heavily related to national security, and then
just loading it up on their personal Windows PC with no apparent encryption or
access controls. For instance why in the world wouldn't they have OS level
software restricting read access of a certain secure partition (or removable
media) to a specific whitelist of processes? Or why wouldn't they use an
airgapped machine? Then there are issues like the NSA being so anxious and
happy to leak this information, and then them indirectly 'wink wink'
confirming it publicly completely destroying the purpose of we don't comment
on speculation --- when you start commenting on certain speculation, it
indirectly says something about other speculation that you actually choose not
to comment on. They're also seemingly unconcerned that somebody is leaking
information that, if true, shows the NSA to be incompetent and also exposes
attack vectors for enemy actors. There are also things like Kaspersky
previously volunteering to provide complete source access to the government.
Our government declined the offer. How does this make sense?

Since Iraq I have become much more critical of pretty much everything. Our
media and our government lied to generate a case for war. And I feel lately
that they are now trying to build a case for some sort of conflict, presumably
cold, against Russia. Or at the minimum start Red Scare 3.0. I have no idea
why they would want to do this, but I tend to abide Occam's razor, and this
all being true requires a lot more effort than this just being "Yellowcake
2.0."

~~~
spaceseaman
> Our media and our government lied to generate a case for war. And I feel
> lately that they are now trying to build a case for some sort of conflict,
> presumably cold, against Russia

I mean, there's verifiable evidence Russia tried to influence our election.
That's pretty new for a lot of Americans. I imagine that's why the government
and the media are running wild with it. Mueller is still investigating. I
would say to wait till that report comes out before jumping to conclusions. I
personally don't think the media and government are gearing up for some Russia
conflict. This is just the first time Russia has been so involved in our
politics since the Cold War, and the media is rightly running with that idea.
Is it that unbelievable for some people that Russia was involved in trying to
influence our election? I can't tell if you're rightly scared of the media or
just can't believe Russia would do something bad.

With respect to the quality of work at the NSA?

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

And finally with respect to all the leaking... I think it's pretty clear
that's just the NSA's lack of confidence in its leader.

~~~
c3534l
Where is this verifiable evidence so I can actually verify it?

~~~
dmix
It's only been ~1yr since the election. You have to be patient for big cases
like this.

Until then we have to trust the US intelligence community. Their messaging has
been consistent that their arch-enemy they've been competing with for decades
pulled a fast one on them and was unexpectedly effective at influencing an
election.

Government sources have been leaking a bunch of stuff to the press in the
meantime. This week it was alleged "Russian-linked" sources supporting the
Republican party had bought Facebook ads [1] in the critical swing states:

> A number of Russian-linked Facebook ads specifically targeted Michigan and
> Wisconsin, two states crucial to Donald Trump's victory last November,
> according to four sources with direct knowledge of the situation.

Two states which Clinton's $500 million campaign reportedly neglected [2]
despite the pleas of her former-president husband and advisors:

> Clinton made no visits to Wisconsin as the Democratic nominee, and only
> pushed a late charge in Michigan once internal polling showed the race
> tightening.

The other big leak was that of the hundreds of people the Trump campaign staff
met and had phone calls with in 2016, it turns out 2-3 of them had connections
to the Russian government. But it's not clear if they had any follow up
meetings.

I'm looking forward to the full report showing the "critical role" Russia
played in getting him elected...

[1] [http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/russian-facebook-
ads-...](http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/politics/russian-facebook-ads-michigan-
wisconsin/index.html)

[2] [http://wtvr.com/2016/11/11/bill-clinton-
strategy/](http://wtvr.com/2016/11/11/bill-clinton-strategy/)

~~~
nl
It's odd that people keep saying to trust the intel agencies, since much of
the best research on the propaganda side is done in academia, and the data is
out there.

Here's a Tableau of the influence of just 6 of the ~200 recently banned
Russian-run groups on Facebook:
[https://public.tableau.com/profile/d1gi#!/vizhome/FB4/TotalR...](https://public.tableau.com/profile/d1gi#!/vizhome/FB4/TotalReachbyPage)

Here's the raw data: [https://data.world/d1gi/missing-fb-posts-w-share-
stats](https://data.world/d1gi/missing-fb-posts-w-share-stats)

Here's some analysis: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
switch/wp/2017/10/05...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
switch/wp/2017/10/05/russian-propaganda-may-have-been-shared-hundreds-of-
millions-of-times-new-research-says/)

I also like
[http://dashboard.securingdemocracy.org/](http://dashboard.securingdemocracy.org/)

If you want to look at research, Oxford is doing some good work in this area.
They have a whole research group on computational propaganda:
[http://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/category/publishing/academic-
art...](http://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/category/publishing/academic-articles/)

~~~
dmix
I read through each of your links and there's _some_ interesting stuff there.
Overall it looks like Russia basically ran a full-time campaign marketing team
with access to a few million dollars for ad and social media sharing buys.

That said, the breathlessly covered "tens of millions of ad impressions" isn't
_that_ much on Facebook. From my experience getting 0.1% of viewers to care
would be a significant number.

Being familiar with online marketing makes a lot of this sound less scary.

What I'd love to see is the Russian ad spending in the great context of the
entire campaign. Considering both sides spent $1 billion on their combined
campaigns it's entirely possible that the ~200 PR stories and 10M ad
impressions are a minor blip in the wider scale.

What's interesting is how many people voluntarily shared these posts because
it struck a chord with them (although it's equally as easy to buy fake
likes/shares). And the fact they were focusing on critical swing states that
Hillary's massive campaign failed to hit, basically non-english foreigners
outperforming the most expensive American consultants...

The leaked data is another story and Wikileaks will never be proven, which
means 50% of the leaked data is very likely via Russia.

For each of these, there were plenty of moving pieces out of Russia's control
(the FBI and media's handling of pretty insignificant stuff, the highly
receptive audience sharing the propaganda, etc) that all worked in their
favour. Even if their contributions were minor, the US political environment
played a huge role in amplifying it into something far bigger than they could
ever do themselves.

Outside of some future smoking gun connection with the Trump campaign (which
seems highly unlikely so far) it's going to be very difficult to measure
exactly how much meaningful influence Russia really had on the elections. But
it's an interesting lesson for the future regardless and the vagueness will
offer plenty of leeway for the Clinton's campaign to sidestep responsibility
for both running a bad campaign and for being a generally unlikable person
(which matters more in these popularity contests than capability).

And if you didn't notice my entire original comment was satirizing mainstream
discourse. I don't think you need or should trust intel agencies nor the
media's uncritical interpretation here. I left it purposefully vague for those
smart enough to see through the popular narratives.

~~~
nl
Measurement of effectiveness is pretty hard, I agree. And as I point out
elsewhere, the Russians promoted diversive left-wing causes as well.

But I wish people would stop making claims that it didn't happen just because
they (reasonably!) doubt the intel agencies. This stuff is trivially
verifiable by anyone with the desire to do so.

------
runesoerensen
Kaspersky preempting (presumably) this story:

 _" New conspiracy theory, anon sources media story coming. Note we make no
apologies for being aggressive in the battle against cyberthreats"_

[https://twitter.com/e_kaspersky/status/915946040561487875](https://twitter.com/e_kaspersky/status/915946040561487875)

Edit: Kaspersky press release [https://usa.kaspersky.com/about/press-
releases/2017_kaspersk...](https://usa.kaspersky.com/about/press-
releases/2017_kaspersky-lab-response-to-the-alleged-incident-reported-by-the-
wall-street-journal-in-an-article-published-on-october-5-2017)

~~~
tlrobinson
Heh, an extreme interpretation of that statement could be that Kaspersky
considers the NSA to be a "cyberthreat"...

~~~
mhneu
Kaspersky was trained by the FSB (former KGB). (Putin has been quoted as
saying "there's no such thing as a /former/ KGB officer").

So as a defacto agent of the Russian government, Kaspersky certainly considers
the NSA (and other Western gov't agencies) to be an adversary.

Agreed that it's crazy that the US govt ever used Kaspersky software.

[https://www.extremetech.com/internet/252421-russian-
cybersec...](https://www.extremetech.com/internet/252421-russian-
cybersecurity-firm-kaspersky-lab-awfully-tight-russian-fsb)

"According to emails obtained by Bloomberg Businessweek (and confirmed by
Kaspersky Lab as genuine), Kaspersky’s ties to the Russian FSB (the successor
to the KGB) are much tighter than have previously been reported. It has
allegedly worked with the government to develop security software and worked
on joint projects that “the CEO knew would be embarrassing if made public.”

~~~
dreamfactored
Well the Pentium chip itself was a Russian design so why not use their AV -
[https://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/06/07/intel_uses_russia_m...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/06/07/intel_uses_russia_military_technologies/)

~~~
mhneu
Cause the Pentium chip doesn't send info back to Russian intelligence
services?

The US has a lot to lose by linking tech firms to intelligence services, but
in this case - when an agent of one gov't is hacking another gov't, links to
intelligence services are suitable for discussion.

------
killjoywashere
I'm going to go out on a limb and propose a hypothesis:

The DoD's hyper-innefficient contracting system rewards DC insiders and
effectively limits the department's ability to invest where investment is
needed while draining the public coffers of unfathomable amounts of money.

The DoD's hyper-ineffective personnel system inhibits personal development
while at the same time making it nearly impossible to move laterally within
the organzation, thus preventing thousands of experts in many fields (that is,
many thousands of experts) from self-organizing into effective functional
units.

These two issues have made the DoD ripe for attack in the digital domain, an
area that has nothing to do with their other core missions areas which are all
organized around delivering kinetic energy to adversaries.

~~~
zghst
The power on the inside is more of a effective deterrent and great asset than
a deficit for the DoD.

Economically how it works is that the DoD secures assets and locations around
the world relating to the means of production of consumer components. American
interests, especially the interests of the American consumer are definitely
protected and represented for.

Where this model has failed for us is put a huge deficit in our self reliance
with regards to consumer production. Due to globalization, American
politicians have no urgent need to educate the workforce more than they
already have, they can provide security and investment to produce a source of
worldwide talent, all thanks to the contractors playing their crucial role in
the ecosystem of American security.

What people fail to understand is that no organization or system is perfect.
The DoD isn't organized for the new kinds of warfare being performed. The main
job of the DoD is to protect American interests abroad, not operate in the
background on American soil against hundreds, thousands of nation-state and
criminal organizations.

The FBI does this job, they successfully work with hundreds of private
contractors. You'd be surprised by the scale on which they are resourceful and
helpful.

~~~
killjoywashere
> not operate in the background on American soil against hundreds, thousands
> of nation-state and criminal organizations.

Actually, this space, this sphere of influence, is well recognized and the
problem has been well described by the senior folks involved since at least
2001:

* Ash Carter (SecDef) Keeping the Edge: [https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/keeping-edge](https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/keeping-edge)

* Michael Hayden (chief of NSA and CIA): Playing to the Edge: [https://www.amazon.com/Playing-Edge-American-Intelligence-Te...](https://www.amazon.com/Playing-Edge-American-Intelligence-Terror/dp/1594206562)

------
uptown
Access via Facebook:
[https://www.facebook.com/flx/warn/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.c...](https://www.facebook.com/flx/warn/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Frussian-
hackers-stole-nsa-data-on-u-s-cyber-
defense-1507222108&h=ATOgadigjpkHQL03AMcyhCHrXLBfAd6WUqXLQPOYEGXvFHFBlJiM_ba_YOKYSbu9_fwXtiH4rp6UMVDCmBhGYYmznJjDRmdxS8a7eCA&_rdr)

Access via Archive: [https://archive.fo/szjBQ](https://archive.fo/szjBQ)

~~~
el_duderino
Access via Outline: [https://outline.com/https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-
hac...](https://outline.com/https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-hackers-
stole-nsa-data-on-u-s-cyber-defense-1507222108)

------
iloveluce
I hope NSA is doing the same with Russian Cyber Defense systems. This is what
NSA should be focused on and not on turning its eavesdropping capabilities
towards the homeland.

What if an adversary where to hack the NSA warehouses were all communications
swept up by their eavesdropping efforts are stored?

~~~
comicjk
I've been thinking about writing a spy thriller based on that premise, ever
since the Snowden leaks. At this point I'd assign 30% probability that it's
already happened.

~~~
kej
That's part of the plot for Dan Brown's _Digital Fortress_ , although like
other Dan Brown books it certainly leaves room for someone else to tell the
same story better.

~~~
treme
what's wrong with ending

every chapter

in a

cliff

?

------
deeth_starr_v
Count me as a skeptic on this one. NSA employee/contractor takes home
classified docs and I am assuming hacking tools, Kaspersky detects the hacking
tools and uploads them to Kaspersky, Kaspersky determines it's NSA tools,
notifies the Russian government, Russian government hacks the computer and
gets all files. Then somehow NSA is able to deduce all this information. I'm
not saying this is not possible, but I think their level of conviction on this
is too high. A home computer is not going to have access logs. So let's say
they see NSA malware in the Kaspersky quarantine folder, and there is also
other malware on the computer. They of course have to assume the worst, that
Russia got all the files. But they are making a couple big logical jumps
without proof. This article is just to sketchy on details for me to take it
credibly.

Makes me think of the claim Cuba is using some kind of new radio brain weapon
on US consulate workers in Cuba.

------
mhkool
Remember the Chinese network equipment allegations? The agencies said hey had
backdoors. That was never proven but what we know is that the agencies had
access over nearly all Cisco equipment.

Now Kaspersky is the next 'unsafe' non-American company... There are only
allegations from an unreliable source: the agencies have lied regularly.

I am convinced that there is an anti-Kaspersky campaign since the agencies
'like' the American antivirus vendors a lot more. I bet the agencies have ways
to spy on users of American antivirus vendors.

~~~
willstrafach
> Remember the Chinese network equipment allegations? The agencies said hey
> had backdoors. That was never proven but what we know is that the agencies
> had access over nearly all Cisco equipment.

They had exploits for both Cisco and Huawei actually.

> There are only allegations from an unreliable source: the agencies have lied
> regularly.

I don't recall that happening, do you have a few specific examples?

> I am convinced that there is an anti-Kaspersky campaign since the agencies
> 'like' the American antivirus vendors a lot more. I bet the agencies have
> ways to spy on users of American antivirus vendors.

Sounds like a very bold claim to make, but no substantiation.

------
austincheney
Another damn NSA contractor took confidential information home. Epic fail.

~~~
mtgx
It's of their own doing:

[https://www.salon.com/2013/06/11/500000_contractors_can_acce...](https://www.salon.com/2013/06/11/500000_contractors_can_access_nsa_data_hoards/)

Also, I believe I read a recent article about them allowing even more private
companies access to this stuff, but I can't find a link right now.

~~~
mhneu
It's partially George Bush's doing - he put a rule into place saying the
government had to hire more contractors. Fits with the GOP plans to weaken the
govt to enable tax cuts for the wealthy, but the increasing use of contractors
has been bad for security.

Full time federal employees take a different oath and generally feel more
loyalty to the agency.

~~~
bokglobule
Ah, maybe not. Watch the film "A Good American". It's out on Netflix.

People are people. Govt employees can have agendas that are bad for the rest
of us just like contractors.

------
cl289
WWCS (What would Clapper Say):

Nov 15, 2017, to Congress: "I can categorically deny that there were any leaks
of this nature during my tenure as Director of National Intelligence."

June 22, 2020: "Well, yes, I did say at the time that I denied it. But I said
'categorically denied'\- that is to say, under certain conditions, or
categories, this could be denied. That is what I meant and I stand by that. I
also used the word 'can,' which is a sort of conditional; look it up in your
grammar books. I did not say 'I do deny,' but 'I can deny.' There are
conditions that might allow one to deny this assertion: i.e. what exactly is a
Russian, what does it mean to leak, or to have leaked, or to have an
inadvertant leak. That is what I meant and I stand by that also."

------
ericfrederich
This came up in congress a couple weeks ago didn't it? I think Rubio had
mentioned Kapersky it knowing that it was a public hearing... some speculated
that this was perhaps because he was privy to some classified things he
couldn't say publicly but wanted to get the word out that they can't be
trusted.

~~~
086421357909764
There's always been a strong narrative, but for a government to call out
another commercial entity and or government for spying is a dangerous game and
only played when it's a big enough issue. It's all politics, they're spying,
we're spying, it's when that crosses the line and we need to slap hands that
matters. Further the public disclosure of _facts_ to support are risky in that
they can give away, tools, capabilities, or accesses that may be unknown to
the foreign actors.

For it to hit the news and the government to ban it, took many years of
balancing and finally something internal broke the camels back so to speak.
I'm not sure if this was it, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's
probably not an isolated case.

------
random023987
Government drone copies NSA malware onto a system with Kaspersky security
software installed for the purpose of detecting malware.

Brilliant

------
jakelarkin
how Kaspersky was ever thought to be "okay" in the US enterprise/government
market has always been perplexing to me. Antivirus, something which literally
inspects all of your files and network activity, made in the country that's a
hotbed of blackhat activity and home one of the most aggressive cyber-
espionage militaries outside the US. yea okay great, sign me up.

~~~
joe_the_user
Well, at this point, which anti-virus product you use is gradually devolving
to "which state do you want to spy on you?". And the problem is, the answer
may not be "the state I live in", since that state is the most likely to tax
and otherwise regulate you.

~~~
lallysingh
[https://www.clamav.net/](https://www.clamav.net/) ?

~~~
gooftop
In this day and age of FUD, what are the odds that said open source software
has a vulnerability or malicious code inserted by some state actor (ours
included)?

~~~
lallysingh
Probably low.

------
pasbesoin
Sorry. I have a point -- towards the end. Even if it's one that gets me
downvoted:

In my personal life, I've been wrestling with the decision to "do the right
thing" and, for example, pay for digital media I consume. Help a friend in
need, who doesn't really reciprocate (because, "the children", among other
things). Purchase the health care insurance that takes away money I could
otherwise spend on immediate treatment.

In each area, I've felt increasingly screwed over.

Shrinking catalogs, and money I paid spent on lawyers ensuring ever-greater
rent-seeking as opposed to actual access to content.

My friend's health on the rebound, while mine has suffered, including from the
depression induced by their abandonment of our friendship once I was,
apparently, no longer necessary.

A health care system that keeps jacking prices and trying also by legislative
manipulation to push me out the door of coverage, regardless of my best
efforts to work with it.

In all these matters, I'm coming to think that part of my failed response
comes down to a simple matter: Don't pay. Stop paying the very systems and
people that or who are screwing you over.

So, here we have the NSA, that is (who are) ever more showing themselves to be
incompetent with regard to what we hope they would accomplish, and outright
aggressive and abusive with regard to us and matters that we consider
commercial contract law, not their business, distracting rather than helpful,
etc.

Helping prop up private IP rights and rent-seeking. Domestic spying.
Accumulating so much data on everything that they can't see the needle for the
haystack -- so, grow the haystack!

I'm hardly one of these bullsh-t "Conservative" (that's with a big "C", to
differentiate from the actual noun/adjective, "conservative"), "shrink/starve
the government" types. Government plays an essential role: It is the
definition of our collective organization and governance.

But in some areas, I really want to say, let's simply stop paying for this
shit.

Because when we pay for it, we only make it stronger. Not the effective
governance we aspire to. Instead, this incompetence that also threatens
aggression against its own society.

------
campuscodi
Has anyone else noticed the influx of anti-Russia articles on the WSJ lately?

~~~
peoplewindow
WSJ and any other media outlet aligned with the globalist, pro-Clinton, pro-EU
world view.

I knew the whole "Putin ate my election" angle was getting completely out of
control when I started seeing people claim, with a straight face, that Russian
interference was somehow behind Brexit. It's the same people making the same
tenuous claims about any political change they hate - it's not legitimate
because anyone who disagrees with me has been brainwashed by tweets.

~~~
dragonwriter
> WSJ and any other media outlet aligned with the globalist, pro-Clinton

No News Corp outlet is aligned with pro-Clinton anything.

------
52-6F-62
Is it just me, or is this possibly related to the Vault 7 materials on
Wikileaks, and thus the WannaCry attacks that brought the NHS to its knees
this past year?

------
codedokode
I remember that Kaspersky helped to investigate some of cyberattacks perfromed
allegedly by western agencies. Could not these articles be a part of revenge
campaign to punish them?

And another thought, if we cannot trust foreign AV software, does it mean that
every country must have at list one national AV product? Or maybe it would
make sence to make some special API for AV software so that it can check files
and processes but cannot send data to the Internet?

~~~
dreamfactored
> if we cannot trust foreign AV software, does it mean that every country must
> have at list one national AV product

That also goes for pretty much every online platform from search to shopping
to social. N.B. The Russians and Chinese are already doing precisely this

------
jpelecanos
For whom do those hackers specifically work for (SVR, GRU, or _Spetssvyaz_ )?

~~~
open_bear
KGB, obviously.

------
blackflame7000
Does anyone really think the NSA isn't trying to hack the Kremlin as well?

------
NN88
Putin is screwed the minute Trump leaves.

------
igivanov
No confirmation from the NSA, only "leaks" from anonymous "multiple people
with knowledge of the matter."

How do we know it's not another piece of fake news riding the wave of "Russia
did it"?

~~~
mozumder
Because you trust journalists to do their job in verifying sources, which
maintains their credibility.

I want you to think your cunning plan through. What do you think would happen
if journalists actually lied?

~~~
pdx
You have GOT to be fucking kidding. Have you actually been asleep for the last
6 years?

~~~
beepboopbeep
You're the only one in this thread that's incredulous about a major
publication posting a researched article.

Clearly we are all out to get you.

~~~
daxorid
pdx is certainly not the only one. Many of us who consider the entirety of
Western Media to be a wholly controlled narrative fabrication oligopoly simply
keep our mouths shut about it.

~~~
mozumder
As they should, since they won't be able to back up their claims with facts.

------
tryingagainbro
NSA /CIA and our National Security is as secure as the weakest link. They need
not be traitors, just people that got too complacent...while Russia never
sleeps (Like NSA does when Russians and others screw up.)

It isn't easy but if tens of thousands people have access to something, it's
just a matter of time. And they need access "to connect the dots" so it's a
losing game.

~~~
TheAdamAndChe
This is an oddly one-sided comment on a complex issue. A computer is an
incredibly complex, incredibly large attack surface, and when you have
millions of computers exposed to the internet and exchanging data, the chances
of a state actor gaining a foothold in a government system is almost 100%.
This goes for both sides: Russia has likely hacked the US a thousand times
over, and the US has likely hacked Russia a thousand times over.

~~~
tree_of_item
How is it one sided? The parent said exactly what you just said. Literally the
exact same thing. "It's just a matter of time" precisely because of the large
attack surface.

------
mozumder
"An NSA contractor brought home documents about U.S. offensive cyber
capabilities.

He used Kaspersky on his home computer.

Russian government hackers stole the documents."

[https://twitter.com/ericgeller/status/915983591737319427](https://twitter.com/ericgeller/status/915983591737319427)

So, yah, avoid Kaspersky AV software.

~~~
keda
Funny how this Cybersecurity reporter publish his PGP key using unsecured
protocol.
[http://www.ericjgeller.com/pgp_ejg.txt](http://www.ericjgeller.com/pgp_ejg.txt)

~~~
strictnein
Uhmm... that's a public key. So it doesn't matter. He could put it on a
billboard in Times Square.

~~~
tlrobinson
I believe keda's point is it's served over HTTP not HTTPS so there's no way to
verify you're not being MITM'd when looking at it.

(A possible workaround is to check via multiple connections, check Google's
cache, etc)

~~~
strictnein
I mean, sure, but if you're sending him a PGP encrypted message, and his
public key was messed with, the end result would just be his inability to open
the message.

I think his actual point was to try and discredit the messenger.

~~~
tlrobinson
The attacker would then be able to read your encrypted messsage (and possibly
re-encrypt it with the original key before forwarding it)

Also, PGP keys may also be used to sign software or other public messages (not
a typical use-case for journalists, though)

~~~
strictnein
You're kind of out in the weeds now.

Also, you don't sign software or whatever with a public key, so I'm not 100%
sure you understand how this works.

