S2E3 - Cyber Attacks, Swatting & Gang-Stalking

Feel free to send me a message if you have something specific you want me to cover this season. Or you can leave me a voicemail at ‪(503) 395-8030 if you have a creepy tech story you’d like it shared on the next episode.

This week we are going to do a deep dive into cyber warfare, the gang stalking cult, swatting. Most of you may have heard about cyber warfare or swatting, maybe just a vague mention in an article or video somewhere on the world wide web.

Over the last decade or so, this understanding and definitions of what Cyber warfare is, has grown in its range to include so many types of crimes that its astounding.

Recently, two amazing individuals sent me a request on Instagram & Twitter to cover both swatting and gang stalking *A quick thank you to both of you! I truly appreciate the requests! *

After looking a bit more into both Swatting & Gang Stalking, I decided to combine them all into one episode since they can both be placed under into the Cyber warfare group which I was planning on covering this season.

Now, let’s jump right in!

Cyber warfare is defined as the use of technology to attack nations, governments or citizens which causes harm that is comparable to that of a physical attack. This can be either emotional, mental or physical harm.

At present, there haven’t been any large-scale cyber attacks that have resulted in either governmental, or international wide consequences. But there have been instances where companies and individuals have been victims of such attacks.

Most recently I covered how hackers use public WIFI to collect information and use it for malicious purposes or how internet bots were used to influence the 2016 U.S elections. You can listen to season 1 episode 5 and episode 7 if you would like to hear more about that.

While we could argue that both of these episodes covered actions that could be loosely grouped under the cyber warfare category. Mainly on the basis that they both used technology to essentially target and, in a sense, attack individuals. Why don’t we take look at a more clear cut case.

We all know that the inner workings of governments can be complex and terribly dark so its only right that I start off the dive with a look into how governments can and do use Cyber warfare to either mitigate, intimidate or actively attack each other.

There is one incident that has held my interest for quite some time. It was even covered in a documentary called Zero Days that I believe I watched on Netflix a while back but it is available on pretty much any streaming platform. This docu broke down the what, why and how of the whole operation and I recommend checking it out if you’d like to know more.

In a WIRED article from 2014 the incident is described as follows:

“In January 2010, inspectors with the International Atomic Energy Agency visiting the Natanz uranium enrichment plant in Iran noticed that centrifuges used to enrich uranium gas were failing at an unprecedented rate. The cause was a complete mystery—apparently as much to the Iranian technicians replacing the centrifuges as to the inspectors observing them. Five months later a seemingly unrelated event occurred.”

The article continues: “Stuxnet, as it came to be known, was unlike any other virus or worm that came before. Rather than simply hijacking targeted computers or stealing information from them, it escaped the digital realm to wreak physical destruction on equipment the computers controlled.”

The virus was designed to take control of the centrifuges with the goal of increasing the pressure to cause a malfunction.

What’s even scarier, is that it took almost a year for this virus to be discovered but by that time, this was just the first implementation of the virus, the hackers were planning on releasing an updated version that would attack the speed of the centrifuges.

Since the system was air gapped meaning that their system had “no direct connection to the Internet or to any other computer that is connected to the Internet, for security reasons, the hackers had to find a way to install the virus without the internet.

And experts believe that they did this by dropping an infected USB drive in the parking lot of the site. They believe that an individual then picked it up and plugged it in to check who it could possibly belong to. Which I’m sure I have done in the past, especially before watching this docu.

Anyways, this was exactly what the hackers were waiting for. Once uploaded, the worm made its way through the nuclear system wreaking havoc and as the news has shown in the past, a malfunction in a nuclear plant is definitely a serious matter.

Now, all of this could have been avoided by providing employees with training on how to prevent the spread of viruses, but I know that this is something that is just now becoming required after all the recent hacks targeted at larger corporations and companies.

I believe that while some things can’t be avoided or prevented from happening, by actively providing yearly training that teaches fundamentals like, how to identify phishing scams, how to verify the credibility of emails or thumb drives and ways to set up proper firewalls is a crucial step in making sure that you or your company are protected or at least a bit more prepared when it comes to cyber attacks of this type. The docu Zero Day continues on to explain how experts found, and neutralized this entire attack and the methods they now use to protect systems from cyber attacks like this one. I highly recommend watching it if this sounds like something you want to know more about.

We know that governments have been aware of if not actively developing and using cyber warfare against each other, but more recently, this has crossed over into our day to day lives. As individuals, its hard to believe that someone or some organization would specifically target us. But that’s no longer a belief we should be holding with absolute certainty.

A very interesting case happened quite recently that could be setting a disturbing trend in more personal types of cyber-attacks. In this particular case, a journalist allegedly sent a seizure triggering image to an individual he knew had epilepsy.

The Washington Post Article I found written in early 2017 describes the incident as follows:

“The journalist, Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald, suffered a seizure in Dallas after viewing the flashing animation when he received it via Twitter late last year, according to a statement from the Justice Department. Eichenwald had written about his epilepsy and publicly described a similar attack several weeks before the Dec. 15 incident, and authorities said the alleged attacker sent Eichenwald the image in an attempt to hurt him as revenge for what he saw as the reporter’s critical coverage of President Trump.”

Why is this a significant case? Well, this is the first time that a crime like this has actually resulted in charges brought against the alleged attacker.

In the article, they stated that “Legal experts compared the alleged crime to sending a letter bomb in the mail, or to purposely giving a person a dangerous allergic reaction.”

Which in itself is an accurate description of the crime and fits firmly under the possible implementations of cyber warfare. This specific crime results in incredibly targeted and destructive consequences not only to the individuals targeted but also to their family members, friends, careers etc.

One of the main goals of these types of crimes is to disrupt or harm specific individuals.

Imagine being an individual with epilepsy and now not only worrying about managing your condition, but also having to worry that by voicing your opinions online, as we all do, or that by posting something someone disagrees with online, that they could send you intentionally triggering images to cause you to have an epileptic episode.

An episode that could result in your death.

This is insanely terrifying, and as I kept researching these types of incidents, I found that this specific one isn’t the only case that has been reported. It’s simply the first of its kind that has resulted in legal charges because the attacker was known.

CBS News covered a case like this one, but with one huge difference. In 2008 hackers gained access to the Epilepsy Foundation website and uploaded seizure inducing images.

The article explains that, “The attack happened when hackers exploited a security hole in the foundation's publishing software that allowed them to quickly make numerous posts and overwhelm the site's support forums. Within the hackers' posts were small flashing pictures and links - masquerading as helpful - to pages that exploded with kaleidoscopic images pulsating with different colors. “They were out to create seizures," said Ken Lowenberg, senior director of Web and print publishing for the foundation.”

These images caused visitors to experience migraines and near seizure reactions. The Epilepsy Foundation took down the images quickly and have now implemented restrictions on what users can post and access. But still, individuals now were forced to consider the consequences of accessing a site that was created as resource for them to manage their condition.

Although advancements in technology bring positive changes to the world we live in, they also come with their own baggage and are changing the rules on every single aspect of possibilities we once thought wouldn’t or couldn’t change.

For instance, playing video games. Most of us have plopped down in front of the TV or Computer and booted up a video game with the belief that no matter how violent the game, what happens in the game could never actually result in physical harm to ourselves or others. Well that all changed quite recently when a new type of crime started making waves on the news and media.

Swatting which is defined as, “the action or practice of making a prank call to emergency services in an attempt to bring about the dispatch of a large number of armed police officers to a particular address.”

These fake calls are usually pretty serious in nature, and often include reports of bomb threats, murders or hostage situations at a specific address. The true motivation behind these calls is something that is so absurd that I did a double take when I stumbled on this particular case.

CNN has been covering the case and explains that, “On the evening of December 28, 2017, a 911 caller told a dispatcher in Kansas' Sedgwick County of a shooting and possible hostage situation at Finch's address, police said.”

Continuing to state that, “Wichita police went to the home and surrounded it. Finch came out of the house when police arrived and was shot, according to the US attorney, when he dropped his hands as officers were telling him to raise his arms.”

Now, the police officers searched the home, found no hostages. Finch died at the hospital shortly after the shooting and once they began investigating the incident what they found had many wondering how this became a part of our society and how to stop it from harming others.

According to CNN and a police affidavit, “Viner admitted that he had argued with the third co-defendant (Finch) – a( 28 year old) gamer in Wichita -- over a multiplayer session of "Call of Duty: WWII," authorities said. Viner was upset because the Wichita gamer, a teammate of his during the session, killed his in-game character. During their argument, Viner threatened to swat the teammate -- and the teammate responded by providing an address and saying, "Please try some s--t,".

Police responded to the call and the rest is a very dark part of history in the making. The CNN article continues to follow the case, breaking down the motivation for the call and the resulting case which lead to Viner (a 19 year old) being sentenced to, “15 months in prison.” And the ongoing legal battle between the Finch family seeking damages in the sum of $25 million, the police officer suing the city of Wichita for lost wages and the state.

This particular case is one that has caused me to begin thinking about the present legal systems’ need to create new laws specifically for dealing with cyber-attacks. Particularly before cases like these occur. Not only this, I’m starting to think that our educational system needs to start considering the ways in which technology can be used, and then put in place classes that teach kids the dangers and consequences of actions like these.

Because to be honest, if parents, teachers, governments etc. don’t begin teaching children about their responsibilities in this changing world, its only logical to assume that they will learn from the world and those lessons, as my mother says, “contain much less love and a lot more hate/hardship.”

In my opinion, it’s logical to argue that if we don’t begin creating and setting a standard for how we treat each other and behave as human beings in this new world, pretty soon (if not already), we are about to start forgetting what humanity feels or looks like and we are about to see a lot more cases exactly like these.

At this point, unless you are in the tech field or at the forefront in developing new technology, its hard to truly understand just how much tech will be changing basic human behavior and the resulting consequences of things we used to consider just “harmless pranks.” I remember back in the day telephone pranks were the big thing. You could use codes to hide you caller ID and to call back the number that just called you. Most kids did this and said things like “Hi sir, we are calling to inform you that you just won a million dollars.” Or something like this that was insanely trivial. Little did we know that soon, these same type of pranks could be used to seek revenge or to actually harm an individual.

Advancements in tech come with baggage, negative ones as well as positive ones. So as individuals, especially as parents, educators and governments, we need to start thinking about this and begin teaching children that just because you can do something you consider harmless online, doesn’t mean that there won’t be real life physical consequences that could change your life and that could result in the death of another person.

There are also a lot of other types of consequences other than death. For instance, due to the changes in technology and the ability to form communities across the world, a new type of community has been formed which some are arguing has changed the way those with existing mental health issues identify and manage their conditions and symptoms.

The emotional and mental consequences of Cyber attacks including swatting, hacking, etc. can be extremely dangerous when it comes to mental health.

As I said, a new type of community has been popping up everywhere but I hadn’t heard of it yet until an Instagram friend sent me a few articles that had piqued their interest. Thank you!

Cults have been a large part of almost all civilizations known to man. These communities have always followed the same type of structure. A youngish charismatic leader, with a new way of seeing the world and our purpose in it, finds a way to get their word to hundreds or thousands of individuals which generates a following of devout followers willing to do anything and everything to remain in the leaders or community’s good graces.

Now what happens when you introduce the ability to meet and speak to billions of people worldwide? Well, cyber cults of course, with one very interesting and significant twist. This instantaneous medium (the internet) of connection becomes the new “young and charismatic leader.” Creating a world where anyone and everyone has a say or possibly even, very real and physical control over an individuals’ life, mental health and perception of the world.

The Gang Stalking community consists of individuals who refer to each other and themselves as T.I’s. or targeted individuals. These individuals all believe that they are being targeted by stalkers, hackers, operatives and individuals online and in the real world.

An article in VICE described the following: In "gang-stalking," everything seems connected, and inconsequential details acquire new purpose. That person who crossed your path earlier. That siren outside your window. That chair in the kitchen—is it where it was before? Has someone been in your house, moving things around? Are there microchips under your skin?”

Targeted individuals believe that the goal of these stalkers is to ruin their lives.

Seemingly unrelated events begin to take on more and more significance as the evidence piles up.

While researching I found a few particular reasons that have been reported this list includes:

1. Because the targeted individual made a mistake or did something in the past they feel was wrong, or that they feel bad about

2. Because they got too close to a conspiracy theory and are now being watched

3. Because of their sexuality

Or a whole bunch of other reasons.

One article by a journalist at The New York Times spoke with individuals from the group and found that the group, “cuts across all classes and professions, and includes lawyers, soldiers, artists and engineers. In Facebook forums and call-in support groups, they commiserate over the skepticism of their loved ones and share stories of black vans that circle the block or co-workers conscripted into the campaign.”

Some of these support groups and forums online are the main resources for individuals who are just beginning to believe that they are being targeted for the reasons above. Veterans of the movement provide advice like:

• Do not engage with the voices in your head.

• If your relatives tell you you’re imagining things, they could be in on it.

And last of all:

• “Do not visit a psychiatrist.”

In the same article the author spoke with a doctor who is currently studying the movement, “Dr. Lorraine Sheridan, who is co-author of perhaps the only study of gang-stalking”

Explains that, “the community poses a danger that sets it apart from other groups promoting troubling ideas, such as anorexia or suicide. On those topics, the internet abounds with medical information and treatment options. An internet search for “gang-stalking,” however, turns up page after page of results that regard it as fact. “What’s scary for me is that there are no counter sites that try and convince targeted individuals that they are delusional,” Dr. Sheridan said.

“They end up in a closed ideology echo chamber,” she said.”

Indicating that because the internet, social media platforms and search engines typically collect information on what you search, what you are interested in and things you’ve liked or commented on, then uses them to show you more things like that, its becoming easier to end up only seeing things that reinforce your view or opinions.

These platforms are essentially creating bubbles of information that contribute significantly to what we believe to be true.

The article also explains that in “Dr. Sheridan’s study, written with Dr. David James, a forensic psychiatrist,

They, “examined 128 cases of reported gang-stalking. It found all the subjects were most likely delusional.”

These individuals typically end up unemployed, they loose friendships, family ties and end up outcasted by the very society that should be helping them. Which leads to a reliance and a stronger foothold in the communities they find online that believe them.

Now, this could be terrifyingly damaging to those who are currently dealing with mental health issues.

But, in cases of individuals who are not dealing with a mental health diagnosis and they are actually the victim of stalking, the consequences are significantly more sinister.

I began thinking of the role that gas lighting plays in stalking cases and this brought me to the conclusion that, this new form of cyber-attacks for the individuals who do not have a mental health issue or diagnosis that are actively being stalked, this will make it more difficult to 1, get help, 2 protect themselves and 3. implement legally enforceable protective restraining orders against the attacker simply because people have more reasons, and more cases of gang stalking incidents that cause them to doubt their experiences.

The existence of gang stalking and the experiences of those who believe themselves to be victims of gang stalking may leak over into actual cases of real-world stalking.

We already have a pretty strong affinity to disbelieving experiences that sound unimaginable or like it should be in a movie. Gang Stalking could encourage this, and society could fall deeper into an auto-pilot mode that groups everyone into this “delusional” subset.

This research raised some complex questions for me, especially in terms of the ideas I have for how to move forward in the legal, educational and parental systems that are currently in place.

Yet, with gang stalking, I’m not even sure how someone could begin to implement changes in the system to help us navigate this new world.

However, I do think that the best place to start would be to begin talking more to each other and building our personal relationships. Simply because by having consistent day to day interactions with individuals in our current presence IRL, I think it may make it easier to tell what’s real and what may just be a delusion.

That’s all I have for you this week & thank you so much for listening!

As I mentioned in the beginning of this episode, if you have a story that has to do with any creepy tech, just want to say hello or anything like that feel free to call ‪(503) 395-8030 & leave a voicemail. I’ll share it on one of the upcoming episodes!

You can find me on Instagram @Tech_Creepy, Twitter @TechCreepy or my website LShompole.com