The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...
2177
The Global Intelligence Files

### Index pages

List of Releases

### by Date of Document

unspecified
2001
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011

### by Date of Release

2001-03-13
2010-03-10
2011-03-05
2011-03-15
2012-01-29
2012-02-27
2012-02-28
2012-02-29
2012-03-01
2012-03-02
2012-03-03
2012-03-04
2012-03-05
2012-03-06
2012-03-07
2012-03-08
2012-03-09
2012-03-10
2012-03-11
2012-03-12
2012-03-13
2012-03-14
2012-03-15
2012-03-16
2012-03-17
2012-03-19
2012-03-20
2012-03-23
2012-03-25
2012-03-26
2012-03-27
2012-04-01
2012-04-02
2012-04-24
2012-04-26
2012-04-30
2012-05-10
2012-06-18
2012-06-20
2012-07-01
2012-07-24
2012-07-28
2012-07-29
2012-07-30
2012-07-31
2012-08-01
2012-08-02
2012-08-05
2012-08-06
2012-08-07
2012-08-08
2012-08-09
2012-08-10
2012-08-11
2012-08-12
2012-08-13
2012-08-14
2012-08-15
2012-08-16
2012-08-17
2012-08-18
2012-08-19
2012-08-20
2012-08-21
2012-08-22
2012-08-23
2012-08-24
2012-08-25
2012-08-26
2012-08-27
2012-08-29
2012-08-30

### Our Partners

ABC Color - Paraguay
Al Akhbar - Lebanon
Al Masry Al Youm - Egypt
Asia Sentinel - Hong Kong
Bivol - Bulgaria
Carta Capital - Brazil
CIPER - Chile
Dawn Media - Pakistan
L'Espresso - Italy
La Repubblica - Italy
La Jornada - Mexico
La Nacion - Costa Rica
Malaysia Today - Malaysia
McClatchy - United States
Nawaat - Tunisia
NDR/ARD - Germany
Owni - France
Pagina 12 - Argentina
Philip Dorling - Fairfax media contributor - Australia
Plaza Publica - Guatemala
Publica - Brazil
Publico.es - Spain
Rolling Stone - United States
Russian Reporter - Russia
Ta Nea - Greece
Taraf - Turkey
The Hindu - India
The Yes Men - Bhopal Activists
Sunday Star-Times - New Zealand

### Community resources

Supporters Support Wikileaks Follow us on Twitter Twitter this Follow us on Facebook

courage is contagious

# The Global Intelligence Files

On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.

## Re: [CT] DISCUSSION - Anonymous vs Cartels

Released on 2012-08-05 20:00 GMT

Email-ID | 156506
Date | 2011-10-24 20:54:22
From | sean.noonan@stratfor.com
To | analysts@stratfor.com
List-Name | analysts@stratfor.com

On 10/24/11 1:50 PM, Tristan Reed wrote:
I agree. I haven't seen any defining attributes of Anonymous as a group.
They may not even know the identities of each other. There are several
facebook / twitter Anonymous pages, which seem to be run by different
individuals.
What about defining Anonymous in terms of the individual? Instead of
saying Anonymous attacking cartels, Individuals acting under the
Anonymous name.... Yes
-But we don't know what information Anonymous' adherents have access to,
and doubt they have such information that provides any sort of
existential threat to the cartels as a whole or their networks.
This is a problem with the threat assessment. Technically, anything
cartel related (emails, online transactions, Mexican LEA information,
etc.) would be available to a hacker, but we don't know if they have had
access to this information, or if the hackers interested in harming
cartels are capable. It's not even confirmed hackers have revealing
information on cartel supporters which the video claims. Yes, it's not
exactly a 'threat assessment'. just say we don't know. And we can say
we doubt they have it because they haven't shown much capabilities to
get at insider/confidential/classified information, rather mostly DDOS
attacks. However, there are people that have demonstrated such
capabilities, and its possible they also joined an 'anonymous'
campaign--like whoever got the recent personal data out of the Sony
PSN.
On 10/24/11 1:11 PM, Sean Noonan wrote:
Somehow we have to stop referring to 'anonymous' as a monolith. They
are a bunch of different people that essentially get together in an
online-form of a mob to carry out some action. I'm not sure how to do
this in writing consistently. But let's start with shit like 'people
joining Anonymous chatrooms and claiming to be part of the movement'
or something like that.
Comments in green below. This is coming together nicely.
On 10/24/11 11:19 AM, Tristan Reed wrote:
do they specify whether or not these are all in Mexico? Are some of
these in the US?
What is the significance of singling out taxi drivers?.
I will have to relisten to video to see if they specifically mention
whether all examples were in Mexico. The Taxi drivers are
significant because they were specifically mentioned as one of the
targets in revealing cartel connections. It also demonstrates a lack
of understanding of who they are attacking. A taxi driver in
Acapulco is expendable to cartels, but may also be cooperating with
cartels out of coercion.
Anonymous does not pose a direct physical security threat to Mexican
cartels. mmmm... i mean, they're not going hold a gun to the head
of el chapo, but there is something to be said for the using
publication as a tool to force government action. If you reveal
actionable intelligence, the government will use it against the
cartels. That's a physical threat, if one step removed. Agreed,
but I want to specify that Anonymous can not directly effect
physical security. Any impact to the cartel in revealing information
will be from actions of rival cartels or the GoM. They may release
information on a given politician being linked to the cartels, but
it's not a guarantee that the politician will feel an impact (Just
because Anonymous says there is a link, doesn't make it true). It
would be up to others to take action. I think the way you have it
worded in the above sentence is good. Follow with a sentence
explaining the rest of it, because readers will have the same
question Karen did. Something like 'Rather, the threat to cartels
would come in what information anonymous could expose that is useful
to their enemies'
Anonymous has demonstrated it's ability to reveal illicit online
activity (child pornography rings) and the cartels are known to
conduct significant logistics and business online. We don't know how
much, but we do know they will have some points of operational
vulnerability I have heard of cartels doing business online, but
don't have specific examples which could be used in assessing their
vulnerability online.
by "no consequences" what exactly do you mean? They can be fired,
arrested or murdered, and that happens all the time. Point taken, I
should say, there is not a guarantee of consequences for calling out
politicians as colluding.
On 10/24/11 9:46 AM, Karen Hooper wrote:
Karen Hooper
Latin America Analyst
o: 512.744.4300 ext. 4103
c: 512.750.7234
STRATFOR
www.stratfor.com
On 10/24/11 9:32 AM, Tristan Reed wrote:
Reposting this with a new shorter focus. Instead of discussing
possible cartel responses, the focus is on what type of threat
Anonymous can pose to cartels. The video released by people using
the banner of Anonymous, threatens revealing personal information
on cartels as well as states a member had been kidnapped. I could
not find any sources outside of Anonymous' claims of the
individual being kidnapped. According to their facebook sites
(Anonymous Mexico and Anonymous Veracruz) it sounds like it may be
an individual posting flyers ['critical of cartels'?] in Veracruz
as part of the Operation Paperstorm protest, although that is
speculation. [this is good and will be enough information to go
with, though you'll need a quick explanation of what 'operation
paperstorm' is. Adding something in the explaining the flyers
will work]
Link: themeData
Anonymous, a decentralized hacker collective famous for
distributed denial-of-service (DDOS) attacks on government and
corporate websites, lashed out at drug cartels via the Internet
with a statements denouncing Mexico's criminal cartels, including
a video depicting a masked individual addressing Mexican drug
cartels on October 10? With the most recent video release,
Anonymous makes bold threats towards the criminal cartels in
Mexico. Threats such as releasing identities of taxi drivers,
police, politicians, and journalists who collude with criminal
cartels do they specify whether or not these are all in Mexico?
Are some of these in the US?
What is the significance of singling out taxi drivers?. The
hacker group demanded Los Zetas release a fellow kidnapped member
otherwise face consequences. In the Anonymous' video, this coming
November 5th was mentioned as a day cartels could expect
Anonymous' reaction if their demands of releasing a kidnapped
member are not met. The potential of conflict between Mexico's
criminal cartels and hackers, presents a unique threat towards
TCOs [If TCO= transnational criminal organization, it's not really
unique. Many such organizations do their crimes online, and have
been hacked in response--like the nigerian princess scams. I think
you should just say it's a unique threat to DTOs] . We know of
cartels lashing out at online bloggers, but I haven't seen any
reporting on cartels dealing with any headaches from hackers
before.
What Anonymous brings to the table in a conflict
o Anonymous would not pose a direct physical security
threat to Mexican cartels. mmmm... i mean, they're not going hold
a gun to the head of el chapo, but there is something to be said
for the using publication as a tool to force government action. If
you reveal actionable intelligence, the government will use it
against the cartels. That's a physical threat, if one step
removed.
o Anonymous' power base is the ability to exploit online
media
o Anonymous hackers do not have to be in Mexico to lash
out at cartels
While not certain, there is a potential for Anonymous to pose a
threat, if it had access to certain types of information:
-The threat is in the information they can expose that may
be of use to any cartel enemies. That could be to the government or
other cartels or even local citizens (the last one may be a stretch,
but i could imagine someone discrediting cartel members in the eyes of
the public).
o It is unknown if Anonymous's claims tocut possess
identifiable information on cartel members
o It is unknown what information Anonymous could acquire
on cartels [cut this part here, and make the point at the end of
this section/paragraph]
o Bank accounts, any online transactions or
communications, identifiable information on cartels members have
to be considered in the realm of possibilities for
Anonymous
o Anonymous has demonstrated it's ability to reveal
illicit online activity (child pornography rings) and the cartels
are known to conduct significant logistics and business online. We
don't know how much, but we do know they will have some points of
operational vulnerability
-They claim to have information on those that collude with cartels
(use the stuff you have above]. Releasing such information could hurt
cartels' support networks, but most of these people are also easily
replaceable.
-But we don't know what information Anonymous' adherents
have access to, and doubt they have such information that provides any
sort of existential threat to the cartels as a whole or their
networks.
Most Anonymous hackers are likely far removed from the
ultra-violent world of drug trafficking in Mexico, but it's quite
possible that some of its members in this campaign are in Mexico
and opposed to the violence [or something like that. my limited
understanding is there are still activist crusader-types in
Mexico, yeah? it seems very possible those with a bit of time or
computer skills could have joined up with anonymous] . As a
result, their understanding of cartel activities may be limited.
Anonymous members in other countries may act with confidence when
sitting in front of a computer, but this may blind them to any
possible retribution. They may not even know the impact of any
online assault of cartels. [the part below and above is written
rather normatively. We need to take that out. just state the
facts]
o Revealing information on taxi drivers and journalists
will cost lives. Anonymous may not understand some of these
individuals are forced to collude with cartels. Taxi
drivers are often victims of extortion or coerced to act as
halcones. Revealing the identity of these individuals will not
have a significant impact on cartel operations.
Politicans have been accused of working with cartels (Guerrero &
Veracruz' governor) before, however there has yet to be any
consequences from this. by "no consequences" what exactly do you
mean? They can be fired, arrested or murdered, and that happens
all the time.
o Anonymous hackers may not understand the extent cartels
are willing to go protect their operations.
o Any hackers in Mexico are at risk.
o Cartels have reached out to the computer science
community before, coercing computer science majors into working
for them.
o This provides the cartels with the possibility of
discovering hackers within Mexico.
need to mention that if Anonymous goes the route of simply
publishing tactical details of cartel activities, they'll be in
the same camp as the bloggers [yes, i think it needs to be clear
that their damage will be similar to what bloggers or wikileaks
can do--limited. But maybe more a danger to themselves, since
they are no longer challenging governments, but criminal
organizations]
On 10/17/11 10:19 AM, Marc Lanthemann wrote:
Oh man we are threading new ground here - I like the idea but
there are several issues to address and fix here.
These are the bullets of my main analytical concern with the
discussion:
o we don't know who got kidnapped or why. that's fine
but we can't gloss over that fact
o "hackers" is a blanket term - there's a difference
between stealing bank records from government computers and
overloading www.loszetas.com main page.
o There's no thought out process of what sort of
information could anon have on the cartels. What kind of info is
kept online and accessible to potential attacks? You seem to be
talking about identities, whose? If anything it's dirty cops,
politicians and businessmen who need to worry about what anon is
going to be saying. Think about why the bloggers and media were
killed in previous instances. Was it because they revealed
operational details, because they acted as informants, because
they exposed links with officials or because they somehow
sullied the cartel's reputation? In short, what kind of
information is damaging to the cartels themselves?
o Once you identify this info - think about if anon can
realistically access it and disseminate it so it causes a
measure of damage. Anon doesn't have any intelligence capacity
except for the technical ability by a very small number of its
members to infiltrate certain networks and databases and steal
information. Now what kind of information would a cartel keep on
a network that is connected to the internet (aka no intranet)?
Where else could information be found? Government databases?
Once we know what kind of information is accessible, we can also
know more about the consequences of dissemination.
o What's the IT capacity of a cartel? Sufficient to
trace back attacks? If it's not, there risks to be a lot of
killings done by people who may not understand the difference
between an anon hacker and a blogger.
On 10/17/11 9:47 AM, Colby Martin wrote:
wanted to forward Karen's thoughts to analyst
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [CT] DISCUSSION - Anonymous vs Cartels
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:28:18 -0500
From: Karen Hooper <hooper@stratfor.com>
Reply-To: CT AOR <ct@stratfor.com>
To: CT AOR <ct@stratfor.com>
you've got some of the issues here, but this is going to need
a lot more work
You need to lay out:
a) What exactly is going on with Anonymous, your trigger
section is unclear
b) what our assessment of the online cartel presence is, and
therefore their vulnerabilities and capabilities
c) How capable is Anonymous of breaching high security
anything
d) how far the cartels would be willing to travel to kill
anyone who breaches their systems or exposes their connections
I also just want to point out that we have reasonable reliable
insight that Sinaloa at the very least has some significant
levels of sophistication in their online presence, to include
the use of cyber currencies and significant IT capacity. There
is no reason to assume that Los Zetas don't also conduct
business online, in a protected fashion.
Karen Hooper
Latin America Analyst
o: 512.744.4300 ext. 4103
c: 512.750.7234
STRATFOR
www.stratfor.com
On 10/17/11 8:46 AM, Renato Whitaker wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:25 AM, Tristan Reed wrote:
Link: themeData
Trigger
Recently, Mexican cartels have faced a new enemy, hackers.
Anonymous, a well-publicized hacker group famous for...?,
lashed out at drug cartels via the Internet with a statements
denouncing Mexico's criminal cartels, including a video
released depicting...? a person talking? a voice? words on a
screen? exactly when?. With the most recent video release,
Anonymous makes bold threats towards the criminal cartels.
Threats such as releasing identities of Mexican? American?
taxi drivers, police, politicians, and journalists who collude
with criminal cartels. The hacker group demanded Los Zetas
release a fellow kidnapped member otherwise face consequences.
The potential of conflict between Mexico's criminal cartels
and hackers, presents an unprecedented war front for the
cartels. The vastly different operations of Anonymous and Los
Zetas leave a conflict both Anonymous and the cartels have
little experience in handling. i believe that Anonymous has no
experience with the cartels. I do not believe for a second
that the cartels have no experience with hackers.
In the Anonymous' video, this coming November 5th was
mentioned as a day cartels could expect Anonymous' reaction if
their demands of releasing a kidnapped member this should be
mentioned right up front. Cartels have a member, Anonymous is
threatening to hit back. Provide enough details so we
understand who this guy is and why/how he was abducted. are
not met. If Anonymous' claims of possessing revealing
information on cartel members and operations are true, cartels
will likely respond with violence against individuals revealed
as opposing cartel members huh? you mean Anonymous members?.
It also is likely that public disclosure of GOM officials who
collude with DTOs will force the GOM to take action, giving
the Anonymous threat complexity i don't understand what this
means. You mean the GOM will threaten Anonymous?. How
effectively any cartel will be able to retaliate against
Anonymous remains unanswered . However, cartels will continue
their threats against any individual using online media WC....
you mean tools? or weapons? We're not talking about bloggers
here. against the cartels.
The Battle Space
Anonymous's and the cartels activities exist in two separate
realities from each other. Anonymous operates solely in sphere
of the computer networks. Anonymous does not experience
geographical boundaries. All personalities within Anonymous,
exist solely in cyber space. (That is not entirely true. They
are physical people tho live in the real world. They have
names and addresses - although most of them are likely outside
of MX.) Anonymous' power base consists of their technical
capabilities in hacking. Any information connected to the
Internet is vulnerable to exploits by hackers. (Identifying
the pc's of individual cartel members in the midst of Mexico's
population could be quite difficult. Remember that most of
what Anonymous has done are DDOS attacks. Sucks if you are
Mastercard or a big company with a website that brings in
revenue, but it does not really matter if you don't run
operations on the web. Los Z don't make much money via
e-commerce. They are also far less dependent on the web than
the jihadists.)
Anonymous is known for its hacking endevours, but it's power
base consists of the perceived anonymity that its members
believe themselves to have, real or otherwise, by operating
through the internet. This gives an opening for people
disgruntled by anything and everything to practice general
dickery. As the popular meme goes, anonymity + audience =
troll. Only a fraction of the large web of people who identify
themselves as "anonymous" have any sort of serious IT
capability.
The largest threat towards a hacker's existence so far has
been from targeted arrests by Law Enforcement Agencies.
The criminal cartels in Mexico operate on the streets in US
and Mexican cities. They are run as a business, always looking
to maximize profits and expand. But they are bricks and mortar
commerce. Yes..... but they use the internet to launder money
and issue commands. We know that Sinaloa does that from
insight. There is no reason to assume that Los Zetas don't
have a similar capacity. Their power base is built by large
amounts of revenue and escalating brutal violence. Cartels
like Los Zetas, are experienced in facing different types of
threats. Cartels are always suffering at the hands of cartel
on cartel violence. While battling each other, cartels still
face arrests by Law Enforcement Agencies. As cartels wish to
avoid any hindrance in the flow of drugs and money, cartels
have targeted media outlets. Murdering journalists and online
bloggers in order to cover details of their operations. ok...
but that's kind of a red herrng for this discussion. You need
to focus on the possible vulnerabilities of the cartels. Don't
just assume they have no cyber presence.
Anonymous' Weapons
Whatever impact will be felt due to Anonymous' actions against
criminal cartels has yet to be seen. Anonymous' only ability
to combat cartels lay in information operations, mainly
disseminating sensitive information on cartels and propagating
anti-cartel statements via social media and defaced websites
in Mexico you mean so far and that we know of?. As Anonymous
admitted in their video to cartels, they cannot fight with
guns. The significance of a targeted information operations
campaign by technically elite individuals can not be
overlooked should not be underestimated. Cartels view main
stream media outlets and social media blogs as such a threat
to their operations, that they have continued to target
journalists and bloggers. Last month, a message signed by Los
Zetas was placed with a dead female body more relevantly, on
the body of a blogger. The message threatened any users who
denounce cartels on blogging websites. getting repetitive
here, and it's not really addressing the subheading
As stated earlier, any information connected to the internet
risks disclosure by Anonymous. There is ample reason to
suggest Anonymous is capable of possessing information they
threaten to release. By releasing identities of individuals
cooperating with Mexican cartels, Anonymous threatens the life
of those individuals. Anonymous's ability to disseminate
sensitive information is limited by what is available via the
Internet. Government computers connected to the Internet
should always be considered a possibility of an attack.
However, as with the compartmentalized nature of the US
governments computer networks, information available to
Mexico's intelligence collection may not be easy to acquire.
what are you trying to say here? This isn't clear at all
Cartel's Defense
A counter response to the video? by the cartels
has yet to see fruition. However, Anonymous' claims of a
kidnapped member by Los Zetas suggest Los Zetas have begun
addressing the threat posed by hackers so... how has there not
been a counter response? also this undermines your statements
above about how Anonymous is soley internet based, and
underlines the vulnerabilities of associated members. How did
they find teh Anonymous member? The answer to that could very
well give you some indication to the technical ability of the
cartels . As Anonymous exists in abstract reality of the world
wide web , the cartels will face a number of challenges which
rarely are posed for them Again, how do you know? The USG has
whole agencies dedicated to fucking shit up in cyberspace. You
can assume (and we have good intel indicating that) they are
working on disrupting the cartels.. Hackers threatening
cartels, can operate in any region of the world. Personal
information including locations is only available if a hacker
chooses to divulge it or if the subject of the attack is savvy
enough to figure it out. Hackers don't only work for
Anonymous. Cartels are only capable of dealing with their
online enemy, if they can physically reach out to them. Or
start employing hackers of their own under their payroll?
Stranger things have happened, Why not a Zetas 2.0?
Cartels have been known to coerce the services of
Mexican citizens with a technical background. Recruiting the
help of computer science majors through personal threats has
been reported in the past where? What cartels? reported
where?. Since cartels operate in the world of urban violence
and drug trafficking, they will likely need the assistance of
technical experts to help combat any threat by computer
hackers. While identifying bloggers inside of Mexico has been
demonstrated, it is unlikely cartels are capable of
identifying any hackers operating outside of Mexico. Even law
enforcement agencies such as the FBi, with far more technical
experience and resources than cartels, struggle to find
hackers through investigations. A) How do you know they are
not in Mexico? (Who was the guy they kidnapped???) B) I'm
goign to assume that not all hackers are equally difficult to
track down
In order to compete with an online foe, cartels
will likely continue counter tactics they are most familiar
with, brute force. Cartels are still capable of their HUMINT
operations within Mexico "still"? why would we assume they
wouldn't be?. Individuals with alleged connections to hacker
communities will likely be targeted and interrogated by cartel
members. Narco banners and public display of violence will
likely continue to be used to scare online media into
submission i'm not really seeing the online
media-international hacking group connection here. The cruel
manners in which cartels inflict harm, is something computer
hackers have unlikely encountered before in their life.
Whether the fear of cartel violence softens the confidence of
Anonymous will remain to be seen until cartels are able to
seek out and capture members of the hacker group.. Or the
Narcos could call the collective bluff and simply go on and
shrug off any inconvenience that Anon can inflict.
--
Marc Lanthemann
Watch Officer
STRATFOR
+1 609-865-5782
www.stratfor.com
--
Sean Noonan
Tactical Analyst
Office: +1 512-279-9479
Mobile: +1 512-758-5967
Strategic Forecasting, Inc.
www.stratfor.com
--
Sean Noonan
Tactical Analyst
Office: +1 512-279-9479
Mobile: +1 512-758-5967
Strategic Forecasting, Inc.
www.stratfor.com