Debunked: AnonSec's NASA Hack, Global Hawk Hijack, Evidence of Chemtrails [Public Domain Data]

[Mick West]

The hacking group AnonSec recently posted a text file, accompanied by a large data dump, in which they claim to have hacked NASA servers while looking for evidence of "chemtrails". Here's how they put it:

One of the main purposes of the Operation was to bring awareness to the reality of
Chemtrails/CloudSeeding/Geoengineering/WeatherModification, whatever you want to call it, they all represent the same thing. NASA even has several missions dedicated to studying Aerosols and their affects on the environment and weather, so we targeted their systems.

Content from external source

This text file (a pruned version of which is attached to this post) and data release has been used by many groups that promote the "chemtrails" theory as "proof" that chemtrails are real, and that there's some kind of secret geoengineering program going on.

Here's the facts behind these claims.

• Anonsec does appear to have at some point gained access to some data on a NASA Server
• The data appears to be not secret, just public domain data (including the list of employees)
• The data dump is just GPS tracks and videos of NASA research flights. Public domain missions.
• NASA does have several programs studying Aerosols and there effects on the weather, but those are studies of pollution, engine emissions, and natural aerosols like dust.
• NASA does use a Global Hawk Drone, but there's nothing secret about it.
• NASA denies that AnonSec controlled a Drone, and beyond AnonSec's claim, there's no evidence they did.
• Someone at AnonSec really believes in the chemtrail theory, but misunderstands the science of contrails.

The official response from NASA:

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2016/02/did-someone-hac.html

"Control of our global hawk aircraft was not compromised. NASA has no evidence to indicate the alleged hacked data are anything other than already publicly available data. NASA takes cybersecurity very seriously and will continue to fully investigate all of these allegations. NASA strives to make our scientific data publically available, including large data sets, which seems to be how the information in question was retrieved. Our Open Data websites offer easier access and use of NASA data through tools and shared experiences using more than 30,000 datasets:

- Open.NASA.gov
- Data.NASA.gov
- API.NASA.gov
- Code.NASA.gov
- GitHub.com/NASA"

Content from external source

The "Data Dump" file released by AnonSec is a 250GB file. It would take me several days to download, so I'm unable to verify its exact contents. However going by AnonSec's own description it is simply flight logs and videos of Global Hawk research flights. This is data that is available over the web in literally seconds.

https://search.earthdata.nasa.gov/search?q=global+hawk


With a few minutes more (getting a free account at EarthData, which only requires a working email address) you can access the raw files on their server

https://ghrc.nsstc.nasa.gov/hydro/details.pl?ds=gripnavgh

​

Once you've signed up, you can access the raw files via a web file browser.

​

These are the same IWG1 files described by AnonSec, and these are what they used to generate some images of the flights of the Global Hawk. There's plenty of data in there for a variety of NASA missions that have interesting looking flight paths. It's all public domain. Here's some I downloaded in about ten minutes.

​

So what are these strange flights? AnonSec presents a list in their text file in a way that makes it seem high-tech

> cat NASA_Missions.txt
ACE	 - Aerosol-Cloud-Ecosystem Mission; learn about clouds from space, satellites
	~ RADEX - Radar Definition Experiment; McChord AFB; ER-2
ARISE   - Arctic Radiation - IceBridge Sea&Ice Experiment; Eielson AFB, C-130
ATTREX  - Airborne Tropical Tropopause Experiment; DFRC; 4 NASA GlobalHawks
DC3	 - Deep Convection Clouds & Chemistry; NCAR; NSF/NCAR Gulfstream-V (GV) aircraft
HS3	 - Hurricane and Severe Storms Sentinel; NWFF; GlobalHawk
OIB	 - Operation Ice Bridge;NCAR Research Aviation Facility; P-3B & DC-8
PODEX   - Polarimeter Definition Experiment;Dryden Aircraft Operations Facility; ER-2
NEXRAD  - Next Generation Weather Radar; 160 Weather Surveillance Radar-1988 Doppler (WSR-88D)
SEAC4RS - Studies of Emissions and Atmospheric Composition, Clouds and Climate Coupling by Regional Surveys; ER-2 & DC-8 & C-20A (G-III) - Armstrong;

But these are all just NASA missions, public domain (like all NASA mission), and they each have a web page explaining what they do, and various sites and data portals that allow you to access the data from those missions.

Take, for example, the most "chemtrail" sounding of the programs AnonSec list, the ATTREX mission. It's just a science mission to study water vapor in the stratosphere to help us better forecast the weather. Here's its web page, with lots of photos of the drone it uses (they use drones as 24 hour long flights are not practical with human pilots):
https://espo.nasa.gov/home/attrex/content/ATTREX


Here's a video explaining what the ATTREX mission is about:

He's one of several data portals that let you get mission data:
https://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/projec...ational_and_meteorological_measurements_table

​

So what have AnonSec revealed to the world? They have revealed that NASA conducts missions that involved planes or drones flying around. That's it. Nothing that isn't already on NASA's web site.

So what's the big deal? Well it seems like someone in AnonSec is a hardcore believer in the chemtrail theory. From the text file:

There is a distinct difference between a contrail and a chemtrail, and any sane person should be able to tell the difference. Contrails, under normal circumstances, dissipate at a constant rate behind the aircraft while maintaining the same length. Chemtrails however, do not dissipate at all, instead they leave streaks across the
sky as far as the eye can see. Not only that but since the aerosols are laden with heavy metals and even radioactive material, so they eventually widen and thin into a haze until the entire sky is completely covered.
Also note, we are completely aware that under certain weather conditions and aircrafts flying at certain altitudes can create a much longer contrail. However it would still dissipate at a constant rate, not spreadout and cover the sky without ever dissipating, like Chemtrails.

Content from external source

This is the fundamental misunderstanding that underlays the entire chemtrail theory. It's the misunderstanding that I first wrote about in 2007, and continue to write about today, nearly ten year later. It's just wrong. Contrails can persist and spread and every book on the weather going back to the 1940s agrees with this.

For example: 1957: Cloud Study: A pictorial Guide, page 79
https://www.metabunk.org/sk/1957CloudstudyapictorialguideOCR.pdf


Yet AnonSec is laboring under this misconception that contrails cannot persist and spread, and hence they have also fallen for a lot of the the other "Chemtrail" misconceptions, in fact a large portion of the text file is basically going through all the commonly given "evidence" for chemtrails - largely things that were debunked many years ago (on Metabunk, or contrailscience.com). This is interweaved with discussions of hacking, and descriptions of the various NASA programs, in a way that might make the casual reader think they are related. But there's no connection here. There's basically the public domain NASA programs, and then there's a bunch of chemtrail speculation that has been bouncing around the internet for years. Putting them in the same text file and adding some (public domain) flight tracks does not create a connection.

The list of NASA employees seems at first to be a serious data breach, however the list is available for public searching at the NASA Enterprise Directory. You can get all the employes by simply restring your searches to narrow ranges (like, last name=A). No hacking required. Just more public data.

Finally there's the claim that Anonsec uploaded a flight plan for a drone to try to crash it. There's really no evidence this actually happened. Obviously a drone never crashed. NASA says they have no evidence that such a thing happened.

But either way, this is a very good answer to the question of "what's the harm" in conspiracy theories. Anonsec is an actual group of hackers. They do hack things. They probably did get into a bit of NASA's network. They may have even attempted to crash a $200 million dollar drone that was just doing science projects to help forecast the weather. They did this because they believed in the chemtrail theory. That's the harm. They were so swept up in the belief that there's something nefarious going on that they thought it was fine to crash one of NASA's science aircraft.

That's why I think it's important to debunk the baseless claims of theories like these. If a misunderstanding of how contrails works can lead to losing $200 million of taxpayer money, and disruption of valuable science projects, then I think debunking that misunderstanding is worthwhile endeavor.



[This is a summary post from material in the thread below. The original first post follows]

 

[Gridlock]

http://www.infowars.com/hackers-allegedly-hijack-drone-after-massive-breach-at-nasa/

AnonSec’s zine specifically cites climate engineering methods such as cloud seeding and geoengineering as the main driver behind the hack.

“One of the main purposes of the Operation was to bring awareness to the reality of Chemtrails/CloudSeeding/Geoengineering/WeatherModification, whatever you want to call it, they all represent the same thing. NASA even has several missions dedicated to studying Aerosols [sic] and their affects on the environment and weather, so we targeted their systems.”

Content from external source

There's 276Gb of data. I'm sure there'll be plenty used in future bunk.

http://nasadrones.thecthulhu.com/ for the data

https://cryptobin.org/b2b572s9 (Password "anonsec")
for the 'zine'.

 

[Balance]

Is this old news?
From 2014 http://anonhq.com/anonsec-hacked-drone/

 

[Mick West]

Is this old news?
From 2014 http://anonhq.com/anonsec-hacked-drone/

If it is, then that was briefly discussed here:

https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-anonymous-exposing-chemtrails.t2286/

 

[Balance]

Not sure what to make of this. https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/anonymous-operation-nasa-drones-anonsec/

Operation NASA Drones was first about getting access to the drones for atmospheric data relating to climate change, but as we dug deeper into their network, we found NASA is involved in more than we could have ever imagined, from chemtrails to UFO coverups and alien reverse engineered technology. This finding was similar to a geologist looking for dirt samples in a Aztec pyramid and finding fuckings El Dorado.

After several years with maintained access to NASA drone servers thanks to the dark army, we have more than enough data to start leaking webcam logins, drone GPS, atmosphere statistics, chemical analysis and video logs. For the past year we have been intercepting all traffic on drone servers and recording the data to recreate the flight paths. Encrypted Full copies of the over 100GB leak of data has been sent to WikiLeaks and TheGuardian with instructions on how and when to release if our demands are not met.

First we want NASA to stop editing its atmospheric data to try and disprove Global Warming and also delete trace evidence of Chemtrails, including but not limited to samples of high amounts of aluminum, barium, strontium and other hazardous or radioactive chemicals being found in the upper atmosphere
Also we want NASA to stop lying and disclose its technological capabilities and accomplishments relating to black project operations for like Operation Indigo Skyfold, Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, Solar Warden, the Earth Defense Force and the Mars Defense Force.

If these demands are not met within the next month, all +100GigaBites data will be leaked promptly and we will continue to propagate deeper into your network and employees lives. We are literally everywhere and can not be stopped, beware of our CyberMafia…

Content from external source

 

[Gridlock]

No, this data was released today. They exploited NASA networks for months, apparently as per their statement motivated by the fact NASA is involved in 'chemtrail' research and/or operations. Given the data is 'unauthorised' I'd expect the usual chemtrail proponents will be all over this.

Hard to verify but they certainly appear to have tried to crash a Global Hawk aircraft. The data includes lots of flight logs for various types.

The contrail research mentioned in the story occurred in 2014.

Edit: It does appear very superficially similar to the documents discussed previously, albeit much larger. I guess we'll see what response, if any, this gets from NASA or the wider media. I'm not about to download the archive to dig deeper.

 

[Mick West]

The supposed #OpNASADRONE is what is referred to in the other thread (which started earlier, but was updated in 2015) starting in post #15
https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-anonymous-exposing-chemtrails.t2286/#post-162228

I suspect that even if it is "new", it's essentially the same thing. A bunch of data from NASA that's basically innocuous stuff like air sampling missions data that was actually publicly available, bundled up to make it look interesting.

 

[Balance]

No, this data was released today. They exploited NASA networks for months, apparently as per their statement motivated by the fact NASA is involved in 'chemtrail' research and/or operations. Given the data is 'unauthorised' I'd expect the usual chemtrail proponents will be all over this.

Hard to verify but they certainly appear to have tried to crash a Global Hawk aircraft. The data includes lots of flight logs for various types.

The contrail research mentioned in the story occurred in 2014.

I agree from my brief looksee. What I don't understand is why anonsec want NASA to admit something that, presumably, can be evidenced from the dox they hacked?

 

[SR1419]

Given the data is 'unauthorised' I'd expect the usual chemtrail proponents will be all over this.

Yes, I have already seen claims of "undeniable proof" regarding this data...despite not actually seeing anything related to geo-enginneering or "chemtrails" except for some editorializing on the part of the hackers (at least from what is available in the box in your first post)

 

[Mick West]

No, this data was released today.

What data? I don't see any data. The link to http://nasadrones.thecthulhu.com/ goes nowhere.

This seems to be just recycling the 2015 story.

 

[Gridlock]

What data? I don't see any data. The link to http://nasadrones.thecthulhu.com/ goes nowhere.

This seems to be just recycling the 2015 story.

Apologies, I forgot the https part and the site doesn't auto-forward;

https://nasadrones.thecthulhu.com

 

[Balance]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02/01/250gb_nasa_data_hacked/

The swiped records include the names, numbers, and email addresses of 2,414 NASA staffers, as well as more than 2,000 flight logs and 600 video feeds from the agency's fleet of aircraft. The hacker team, calling itself Anonsec, published the data on the web with an explanation of how the hack took place.

Anonsec didn't perform the initial intrusion into NASA, the group claims, but bought access to an agency computer from another hacker. It was only a user account, but the group mapped out what they could of the network and set to work....... "One of the main purposes of the Operation was to bring awareness to the reality of Chemtrails/CloudSeeding/Geoengineering/Weather Modification, whatever you want to call it, they all represent the same thing. NASA even has several missions dedicated to studying Aerosols and their affects (sic) on the environment and weather, so we targeted their systems," the group states.

Content from external source

 

[skephu]

LOL... AnonSec even links Contrail Science:

Sites for monitoring US from satellite imagery:
http://weather.cod.edu/satrad/
http://contrailscience.com/map/
https://webdir.nasa.gov

Content from external source

(this is from the text linked at AnonSec's facebook page)

 

[Balance]

I'm sure there'll be plenty used in future bunk.

Yup. https://www.facebook.com/groups/1718300248398617/permalink/1744766079085367/

Cynthia Khos
14 hrs

NASA Gets Hacked! What Was Leaked Turns This Conspiracy Theory Into Fact…


and http://www.anonews.co/anon-release-leaked-nasa-information/

Anonymous have leaked information that they claim originate from NASA servers, showing evidence of an extensive drone weather modification program that prove that Chemtrails exist.

Content from external source

and one more for good measure https://www.facebook.com/UnitedLegionOfAnonymiss/posts/1020213294686891

United Legion Of Anonymiss
5 hrs·
Anonymous have leaked information that they claim originate from NASA servers, showing evidence of an extensive drone weather modification program that prove that Chemtrails exist.


Anonymous Release NASA Documents Proving Chemtrails To Be Real –...
Anonymous have leaked information that they claim originate from NASA…
YOURNEWSWIRE.COM|BYSEAN ADL-TABATABAI

 

[Balance]

Has someone been busy getting sites/tweets taken down?
https://nasadrones.thecthulhu.com/ is down for instance

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't see anything new, this was doing the rounds ages ago. Basically they seem to think that NASA missions to study atmospheric aerosols = proof of chemtrails. The word "aerosol" seems to make people go funny...

 

[skephu]

Looks like they found some data on the ACCESS II (Alternative Fuel Effects on Contrails and Cruise Emissions) series of experiments where NASA tested whether mixing biofuel into JP-8 jet fuel would reduce emissions and whether it would have any effect on contrails. Of course there is nothing secret about this and many articles have been published about it, e.g. NASA: ACCESS II confirms jet biofuel burns cleaner.
They found that soot emissions were reduced by ~50% when using the blended fuel, although the effect on contrails is not clear.

 

[skephu]

NASA denies that their drone was hacked:

"Control of our global hawk aircraft was not compromised. NASA has no evidence to indicate the alleged hacked data are anything other than already publicly available data. NASA takes cybersecurity very seriously and will continue to fully investigate all of these allegations. NASA strives to make our scientific data publically available, including large data sets, which seems to be how the information in question was retrieved. Our Open Data websites offer easier access and use of NASA data through tools and shared experiences using more than 30,000 datasets:

- Open.NASA.gov
- Data.NASA.gov
- API.NASA.gov
- Code.NASA.gov
- GitHub.com/NASA"

Content from external source

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2016/02/did-someone-hac.html

 

[Balance]

Yep, aside from the usual confirmation-bias sharing, a certain group seem unusually mute on discussion as these comments sum it up nicely.


Douglas E De VriesShocking. They spent months in NASA servers and all they found was an alternative fuels testing program that was already publicly known.

If anything, this should demonstrate that there is no secret chemtrail program.
Like·Reply·1 hr

Mi Lenaoh, no comments from the trolls, i'm surprised
Like·Reply·31 mins

Douglas E De VriesHardly. A group spends months inside NASA servers, and all they can come up with is a program that was not a secret? Come on.
Like·Reply·24 mins

 

[Balance]

It's odd. The twitter account holder (who, presumably hosted the download link as it's the same name) also posted this on Jan30th

and he's not really anonymous https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cthulhu_(developer)

Reading through tweets, I get the impression all this is self-promotion to land a well-paid IT security job.

 

[Balance]

the alleged hacked data are anything other than already publicly available data.

So..... debunked.... again?

 

[skephu]

So..... debunked.... again?

From the large text file that AnonSec posted, it really appears that they managed to intrude into some servers. They describe the details of how they gained access. Whether they gained control over the drone, I don't know.

 

[Balance]

From the large text file that AnonSec posted, it really appears that they managed to intrude into some servers. They describe the details of how they gained access. Whether they gained control over the drone, I don't know.

I know. The thread claims aren't so specific but...
They admit they bought access from another hacker.
The data is publicly available (according to NASA and others).
They didn't crash the drone and NASA says there's no indication it ever was under another's control.
There's no evidence of chemtrails.
So what's left?

 

[Mick West]

So what's left?

What's left is a piece of chemtrail mythology. This has been presented by Inforwars and others as "proof" of chemtrails, and so of course people will believe it.

I'll write up a summary "debunked" explanation to go at the top of the threads. I was just on the NASA web site "hacking" some Global Hawk GPS tracks.

 

[MyMatesBrainwashed]

So what's left?

Misconstruing the data.

 

[SR1419]

Has someone been busy getting sites/tweets taken down?
https://nasadrones.thecthulhu.com/ is down for instance

its back up:

NASA Drones Data Dump

For those who have asked how they can help with server costs, see www.thecthulhu.com/donate thanks!

I have been asked to help host the following files again in the public interest. As a host of the file, I am not making any claims for the authenticity of the information
or subsequent claims about what the data does or does not show. Conclusions should therefore be derived from the proper interrogation of the material.

Download

Content from external source

 

[Balance]

The data appears to be not secret, just public domain data (except for a list of employees)

thanks to skephu's response (#18) we know even employee details are (with the right queries) publicly accessible too. https://people.nasa.gov/

 

[Mick West]

thanks to skephu's response (#18) we know even employee details are (with the right queries) publicly accessible too. https://people.nasa.gov/

Thanks, fixed.

 

[Gridlock]

Good work Mick, thanks.

Response from NASA spokesman here:

https://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-nasa-hack-is-probably-the-most-mundane-hack-ever

A NASA spokesperson, however, denied the hackers’ claims.

“Control of our Global Hawk aircraft was not compromised,” NASA’s Allard Beutel said in a statement on Monday night. “NASA has no evidence to indicate the alleged hacked data are anything other than already publicly available data.”

In a previous exchange on Friday, Beutel said that “NASA strives to make our scientific data publicly available, including large data sets, which is how the information in question was retrieved. In other words, we gave it away, it wasn’t stolen.”

Content from external source

 

[skephu]

Jim Lee's reaction:


But the commenters under his post seem to misunderstand him, thinking that he's complaining that it was him who exposed the program rather than AnonSec.

 

[Balance]

An update from the host's site https://nasadrones.thecthulhu.com/

...Update: As per my above disclaimer, it does appear the group behind this were indeed not being entirely truthful and the data
is from public archives instead. For more information, read Forbes' article here. This will be kept online for the record though.....

Content from external source

 

[Northern-nosypants]

It strikes me that this data dump is different from other more famous leaks like the Panama papers and the Snowden material. In this case it seems to have been published unfiltered and unexamined by professional journalists. The more important and revealing leaks are being backed up by hardworking news organisations like The Manchester Gaurdian which is itself set apart from the mainstream media by being owned by a charitable foundation and having a history of making trouble for the authorities.

 

[Hevach]

It's different from those leaks because this was all already public information. They didn't hack anything, steal anything, or even reveal anything. They just grabbed a bunch of random things off media and academic servers and claimed it said something that it never did. The scientific media took a look, said, "Hey, a lot of that seems to be off the public FTP," NASA answered, "Yep, and the rest is off these more obscure public servers over here," and long before the mainstream media cycle even began it was already all in writing that nothing had actually happened.