Comments on: L'affaire Petraeus: second woman identified, and Gmail metadata outed Broadwell and Petraeus http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html Brain candy for Happy Mutants Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:12:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: Ito Kagehisa http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1582740 Ito Kagehisa Wed, 14 Nov 2012 23:44:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1582740 Actually, it does record the address of the machine that created the mail.  Which is going to be 10.x.x.x whatever since the machine that created the mail is a webserver on Google's internal network, behind a load balancer that does network address translation. Actually, it does record the address of the machine that created the mail.  Which is going to be 10.x.x.x whatever since the machine that created the mail is a webserver on Google’s internal network, behind a load balancer that does network address translation.

]]> By: MurasakiMadness http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1581875 MurasakiMadness Tue, 13 Nov 2012 23:56:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1581875 Maybe news outlets have a sweeps week? Maybe news outlets have a sweeps week?

]]> By: Ito Kagehisa http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1581790 Ito Kagehisa Tue, 13 Nov 2012 23:10:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1581790 Yep, your simple answer is entirely correct. And any articles that suggest you can get the IP address of a gmail user's PC from the headers of a gmail message are wrong, as you already figured out by doing the experiment yourself (yay science!). And you're also right about Google's headers being less useful than most, but that's mostly because it's webmail.  If the MTA was bog-standard sendmail (it's probably tweaked sendmail or postfix) you'd get the same headers.  See, you connect to a google MUA, which is a web server behind a load balancer, it will let you generate a message, which is then sent to a google MTA, possibly on the same host but probably not.  The MTA sees the message as originating from a google host, on a google 10.x.x.x address (because we're still behind the load balancer, which is distributing connections it receives on an external, IANA portable address, to internal hosts on RFC1918 private addresses using NAT).  Remember, it's the MTA that stuffs addresses into the headers, and as far as the MTA is concerned that message came from an internal google webserver, it doesn't know the IP of the PC you used to talk to that webserver.  It would not be a violation of SMTP for the webmail service MUA to put in a received: line with your client PC address, but it would be unusual. Yep, your simple answer is entirely correct.

And any articles that suggest you can get the IP address of a gmail user’s PC from the headers of a gmail message are wrong, as you already figured out by doing the
experiment yourself (yay science!).

And you’re also right about Google’s headers being less useful than most, but that’s mostly because it’s webmail.  If the MTA was bog-standard sendmail (it’s probably tweaked sendmail or postfix) you’d get the same headers.  See, you connect to a google MUA, which is a web server behind a load balancer, it will let you generate a message, which is then sent to a google MTA, possibly on the same host but probably not.  The MTA sees the message as originating from a google host, on a google 10.x.x.x address (because we’re still behind the load balancer, which is distributing connections it receives on an external, IANA portable address, to internal hosts on RFC1918 private addresses using NAT).  Remember, it’s the MTA that stuffs addresses into the headers, and as far as the MTA is concerned that message came from an internal google webserver, it doesn’t know the IP of the PC you used to talk to that webserver.  It would not be a violation of SMTP for the webmail service MUA to put in a received: line with your client PC address, but it would be unusual.

]]> By: MiG http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1581453 MiG Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:49:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1581453 The simple answer, I guess, is that the FBI asked Google for the identifying information (IP address, etc). Which, as you suggest, they store and cross-referenced with the unique message ID. And Google provided them with it. Some of the articles, however, seemed to suggest that this information is *automatically* included in gmail messages (i.e.: in the header). From what I can see, Google actually includes less information than other e-mail providers in the header. For example, the client IP isn't included. The simple answer, I guess, is that the FBI asked Google for the identifying information (IP address, etc). Which, as you suggest, they store and cross-referenced with the unique message ID. And Google provided them with it.
Some of the articles, however, seemed to suggest that this information is *automatically* included in gmail messages (i.e.: in the header). From what I can see, Google actually includes less information than other e-mail providers in the header. For example, the client IP isn’t included.

]]> By: Ito Kagehisa http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1581438 Ito Kagehisa Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:40:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1581438 I don't know what format the iPhone uses, but most of the image formats have tremendous metadata carrying capabilities.  For instance, they might include lens type, photographer, date, latitude and longitude, cardinal facing (N/S/E/W) or a bazillion other things, depending on what the format is and how much of the format Apple decided to bother with in any particular iPhone software release. The only way to be sure is to break down the image with professional tools and examine it.  Then you will know, at least until the next software update, when you'll have to do it again. Personally, I always assume all communication is monitored and all images are traceable. I don’t know what format the iPhone uses, but most of the image formats have tremendous metadata carrying capabilities.  For instance, they might include lens type, photographer, date, latitude and longitude, cardinal facing (N/S/E/W) or a bazillion other things, depending on what the format is and how much of the format Apple decided to bother with in any particular iPhone software release.

The only way to be sure is to break down the image with professional tools and examine it.  Then you will know, at least until the next software update, when you’ll have to do it again.

Personally, I always assume all communication is monitored and all images are traceable.

]]> By: Ito Kagehisa http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1581415 Ito Kagehisa Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:28:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1581415 It's in the mail log at google, which they can cross-reference by the messageID that was assigned to your email.  See my other reply to your question for more details.  Here's a notional example, though: protocol: SMTP date: 13 Nov 2012 02:42:11GMT messageID: <FTEXCHANGEtMumY2MIa000052c7@ftexchange.getdubai.com> interface: Outside (IP xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx) incoming connection from sender IP: 213.42.75.244 (insurance.getgroup.com) reverse DNS host insurance.getgroup.com verified: no helo identity: postmaster@ftexchange.getdubai.com SPF: tempfail DKIM: none spamassassin score: 8 sophos antivirus: negative clamav: negative This example, mostly pulled from a real mail log entry (not at Google, mailserver IP address x'ed out) shows that someone connected from a host at 213.42.75.244 and the first thing they said was "hello, I'm postmaster ftexchange.dubai.com!" (which is a name that does not resolve to anything, incidentally.  It's probably a zombie'd Microsoft Exchange system in Dubai that isn't supposed to be talking to the Internet).  If you look up the IP address 213.42.75.244 in reverse, you get insurance.getgroup.com, but if you look up insurance.getgroup.com, you get a completely different IP.  There is no useful SPF or DKIM.  Spamassassin says it's spam.  No viruses according to Sophos, and although Sophos is lame, also no viruses according to Clam.  We've got enough here to know it's a spammer, like 90%+ of all email is. Typing this in Disqus was a painful experience... sorry about the spurious links and noise, I tried to make it stop, but it's a really bad interface for technical data... It’s in the mail log at google, which they can cross-reference by the messageID that was assigned to your email.  See my other reply to your question for more details.  Here’s a notional example, though:

protocol: SMTP
date: 13 Nov 2012 02:42:11GMT
messageID: <FTEXCHANGEtMumY2MIa000052c7@ftexchange.getdubai.com>
interface: Outside (IP xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx)
incoming connection from sender IP: 213.42.75.244 (insurance.getgroup.com)
reverse DNS host insurance.getgroup.com verified: no
helo identity: postmaster@ftexchange.getdubai.com
SPF: tempfail
DKIM: none
spamassassin score: 8
sophos antivirus: negative
clamav: negative

This example, mostly pulled from a real mail log entry (not at Google, mailserver IP address x’ed out) shows that someone connected from a host at 213.42.75.244 and the first thing they said was “hello, I’m postmaster ftexchange.dubai.com!” (which is a name that does not resolve to anything, incidentally.  It’s probably a zombie’d Microsoft Exchange system in Dubai that isn’t supposed to be talking to the Internet).  If you look up the IP address 213.42.75.244 in reverse, you get insurance.getgroup.com, but if you look up insurance.getgroup.com, you get a completely different IP.  There is no useful SPF or DKIM.  Spamassassin says it’s spam.  No viruses according to Sophos, and although Sophos is lame, also no viruses according to Clam.  We’ve got enough here to know it’s a spammer, like 90%+ of all email is.

Typing this in Disqus was a painful experience… sorry about the spurious links and noise, I tried to make it stop, but it’s a really bad interface for technical data…

]]> By: Ito Kagehisa http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1581370 Ito Kagehisa Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:03:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1581370 The Simple Mail Transfer Protocal (SMTP is the definition of internet email) specifies both an <strong>envelope</strong> and a <strong>message</strong>.  The three major components of an email system are <strong>M</strong>ail <strong>T</strong>ransfer <strong>A</strong>gents (which are mail <em>hubs</em>, so you can think of them as post offices), <strong>M</strong>ail <strong>D</strong>elivery <strong>A</strong>gents, and <strong>M</strong>ail <strong>U</strong>ser <strong>A</strong>gents (also called <em>mail clients</em> or mail <em>readers</em>. It's important to understand that only MTAs get the envelope.  The headers that an email recipient can see using an MUA like gmail's web page are not the envelope - you have <em>no access</em> to the envelope unless you are an email administrator. This might explain to you how come you sometimes get mail that has someone else's email address in the To: field of the message headers - it's because message headers are part of the message, and not part of the envelope.  The <em>envelope alone</em> is what determines who will receive the message.  A lot of the headers are noise to an MTA - in particular, the To:, From: and Subject: fields will be ignored by MTAs. Now, that being said, MTAs almost always add data to each message they process.  Typically, a received: header line will be added that says "I got this from IP address whatever which claimed to be named this and is actually named that".  A really good email system will add DKIM and SPF and similar authentication results as well.  But you have to realize these added header lines are trivially spoofable - only the most recent one was added by the last MTA that handled the message, so all previous ones could have been faked up when the message was created. SO, there's some critical metadata in the envelope, which only Google has access to.  And there are some fairly unreliable "chicken tracks" in the headers as well.  If you have the envelope, or the headers are reasonably complete, the unique message ID can also be checked against the mail log, which records the sources and final destinations of all SMTP transactions by IP address. Does that help? The Simple Mail Transfer Protocal (SMTP is the definition of internet email) specifies both an envelope and a message.  The three major components of an email system are Mail Transfer Agents (which are mail hubs, so you can think of them as post offices), Mail Delivery Agents, and Mail User Agents (also called mail clients or mail readers.

It’s important to understand that only MTAs get the envelope.  The headers that an email recipient can see using an MUA like gmail’s web page are not the envelope – you have no access to the envelope unless you are an email administrator.

This might explain to you how come you sometimes get mail that has someone else’s email address in the To: field of the message headers – it’s because message headers are part of the message, and not part of the envelope.  The envelope alone is what determines who will receive the message.  A lot of the headers are noise to an MTA – in particular, the To:, From: and Subject: fields will be ignored by MTAs.

Now, that being said, MTAs almost always add data to each message they process.  Typically, a received: header line will be added that says “I got this from IP address whatever which claimed to be named this and is actually named that”.  A really good email system will add DKIM and SPF and similar authentication results as well.  But you have to realize these added header lines are trivially spoofable – only the most recent one was added by the last MTA that handled the message, so all previous ones could have been faked up when the message was created.

SO, there’s some critical metadata in the envelope, which only Google has access to.  And there are some fairly unreliable “chicken tracks” in the headers as well.  If you have the envelope, or the headers are reasonably complete, the unique message ID can also be checked against the mail log, which records the sources and final destinations of all SMTP transactions by IP address.

Does that help?

]]> By: Carsten Agger http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1581228 Carsten Agger Tue, 13 Nov 2012 16:15:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1581228 I'm not really getting why this infidelity story is getting this much coverage in the media. In my view, here's the only really newsworthy fact about Petraeus: The guy is a war criminal. Why isn't he in jail? http://warcriminalswatch.org/index.php/the-culpable/36-the-culprits/161-petraeus-david-h I’m not really getting why this infidelity story is getting this much coverage in the media.

In my view, here’s the only really newsworthy fact about Petraeus: The guy is a war criminal. Why isn’t he in jail?

http://warcriminalswatch.org/index.php/the-culpable/36-the-culprits/161-petraeus-david-h

]]> By: Ito Kagehisa http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1581188 Ito Kagehisa Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:17:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1581188  I don't mean to be rude, but wouldn't it have been more concise to just say "The sky is falling, the sky is falling?"  I don’t mean to be rude, but wouldn’t it have been more concise to just say “The sky is falling, the sky is falling?”

]]> By: Rindan http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1581095 Rindan Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:21:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1581095 Fear not (or, um, fear more?), both the EU and the US can tank the world economy. The US fiscal cliff is when a pile of tax cuts suddenly vanish while at the same time some BRUTAL spending cuts go into place. It was a suicide congress signed into law in the laughable naive attempt to try and force itself to deal with the budget. It is not just austerity, it is a blatant suicide pact. It will slice off percentage points of the US GDP, turn off pretty much the stimulus from social welfare programs, gut the government, and raise taxes on everyone pretty much all at once. It happens in January unless congress does something. Everyone, left, right, whatever, agrees it is a very bad thing. Despite this, the compromise to prevent it is elusive. Both parties have to agree in the US system at least a little, so it takes just one side to dig in their heels. The problem is that if the US jumps off a fiscal cliff, it drags the entire world with it. The US economy is just so damned big and the dollar so tied into the world economy that when the US goes belly up, it drags the rest of the world with it. So, the EU certainly has problems and can sink the world economy, but those are slow moving mountains of doom that will slowly drag us down over a period of time. The US fiscal cliff that could usher in a world wide Econopocolypse Part 2 hits in less than two months. You should have EU doom in the back of your mind, but the US fiscal cliff should have you in a panic now, regardless of where you live. If a few hundred old rich white guys (and a few token minorities and women) don't suddenly find a compromise NOW, you, where you live in the world, are totally screwed. Fear not (or, um, fear more?), both the EU and the US can tank the world economy. The US fiscal cliff is when a pile of tax cuts suddenly vanish while at the same time some BRUTAL spending cuts go into place. It was a suicide congress signed into law in the laughable naive attempt to try and force itself to deal with the budget. It is not just austerity, it is a blatant suicide pact. It will slice off percentage points of the US GDP, turn off pretty much the stimulus from social welfare programs, gut the government, and raise taxes on everyone pretty much all at once. It happens in January unless congress does something. Everyone, left, right, whatever, agrees it is a very bad thing. Despite this, the compromise to prevent it is elusive. Both parties have to agree in the US system at least a little, so it takes just one side to dig in their heels.

The problem is that if the US jumps off a fiscal cliff, it drags the entire world with it. The US economy is just so damned big and the dollar so tied into the world economy that when the US goes belly up, it drags the rest of the world with it.

So, the EU certainly has problems and can sink the world economy, but those are slow moving mountains of doom that will slowly drag us down over a period of time. The US fiscal cliff that could usher in a world wide Econopocolypse Part 2 hits in less than two months. You should have EU doom in the back of your mind, but the US fiscal cliff should have you in a panic now, regardless of where you live. If a few hundred old rich white guys (and a few token minorities and women) don’t suddenly find a compromise NOW, you, where you live in the world, are totally screwed.

]]> By: Antinous / Moderator http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580684 Antinous / Moderator Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:41:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580684 Would it perk you up to know that this one is a twin? Would it perk you up to know that this one is a twin?

]]> By: First Last http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580580 First Last Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:14:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580580 That kind of stopped applying to him when he retired from the military. That kind of stopped applying to him when he retired from the military.

]]> By: snowmentality http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580561 snowmentality Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:01:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580561  Because he wouldn't be trying to keep it a secret that he's sleeping with his wife, so no one would be able to use that information to blackmail him. It's less of a worry that he might give classified information to his mistress, and more of a worry that someone working for a foreign government or organization might say to him "Hey, give me this classified information or I'll tell everyone you're boinking your biographer."  Because he wouldn’t be trying to keep it a secret that he’s sleeping with his wife, so no one would be able to use that information to blackmail him. It’s less of a worry that he might give classified information to his mistress, and more of a worry that someone working for a foreign government or organization might say to him “Hey, give me this classified information or I’ll tell everyone you’re boinking your biographer.”

]]> By: angrygoldfish http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580532 angrygoldfish Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:25:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580532 I'm still not sure it didn't come from Broadwell's husband. All the NYT is in a position to say is that it wasn't signed by so-and-so. But who, in writing such a letter, is going to sign their real name? I’m still not sure it didn’t come from Broadwell’s husband.

All the NYT is in a position to say is that it wasn’t signed by so-and-so. But who, in writing such a letter, is going to sign their real name?

]]> By: Message in a Bottle http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580529 Message in a Bottle Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:22:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580529 Still curious how Kelley's FBI friend connects to Reichert, and wondering how often FBI contractors &/or employees that peer through keyholes, eavesdrop at the table, listen at the transom and over the telephone, monitor electronic communication and crawl under the bed, are involved with a junior member of congress? Still curious how Kelley’s FBI friend connects to Reichert, and wondering how often FBI contractors &/or employees that peer through keyholes, eavesdrop at the table, listen at the transom and over the telephone, monitor electronic communication and crawl under the bed, are involved with a junior member of congress?

]]> By: Mark Devlin http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580491 Mark Devlin Mon, 12 Nov 2012 18:47:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580491 WeCheck.org has a full wiki (editable) timeline of events: http://wecheck.org/wiki/David_Petraeus_Scandal_Timeline WeCheck.org has a full wiki (editable) timeline of events: http://wecheck.org/wiki/David_Petraeus_Scandal_Timeline

]]> By: strangefriend http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580360 strangefriend Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:54:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580360 Rindan, I was going to like your comment until I read your 'fiscal cliff' comment.  The world economy would tank because Europe has embraced <i>austerity</i> when it should have done <b>stimulus </b>.  Embrace the Keynesianism, dude! Rindan, I was going to like your comment until I read your ‘fiscal cliff’ comment.  The world economy would tank because Europe has embraced austerity when it should have done stimulus .  Embrace the Keynesianism, dude!

]]> By: Jellodyne http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580340 Jellodyne Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:22:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580340 And then royaltrux called us large. And then royaltrux called us large.

]]> By: robcat2075 http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580337 robcat2075 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:19:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580337 Suddenly every reporter seems to be coming out with long-sat-on stories about how Petraeus wasn't as fantastic as they had previously reported. What do we have to do to get the stories before events make them purely CYA filings? Suddenly every reporter seems to be coming out with long-sat-on stories about how Petraeus wasn’t as fantastic as they had previously reported.

What do we have to do to get the stories before events make them purely CYA filings?

]]> By: Sekino http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580321 Sekino Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:58:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580321 Totally off topic and frivolous... Is it just me or they look remarkably alike, like siblings (bad haircut aside)? Totally off topic and frivolous… Is it just me or they look remarkably alike, like siblings (bad haircut aside)?

]]> By: ChickieD http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580310 ChickieD Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:29:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580310 These inside the Beltway scandals always amuse me. Political women are so careful to adopt an asexual style of dress, they are the opposite of lascivious.  Years ago when Newt Gingrinch was in the news for his affair with his mistress, I happened to end up at the same Inn where he was staying with said mistress. She was a complete and total wonk, in her blue wool suit, sensible heels, and helmet hair (at what, the age of 30, she has this hair?).  These inside the Beltway scandals always amuse me. Political women are so careful to adopt an asexual style of dress, they are the opposite of lascivious. 

Years ago when Newt Gingrinch was in the news for his affair with his mistress, I happened to end up at the same Inn where he was staying with said mistress. She was a complete and total wonk, in her blue wool suit, sensible heels, and helmet hair (at what, the age of 30, she has this hair?). 

]]> By: MrJM http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580302 MrJM Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:20:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580302 And that adulatory is a violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ with a maximum punishment of dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year. But, you know, other than that... And that adulatory is a violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ with a maximum punishment of dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year.

But, you know, other than that…

]]> By: Doug Ross http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580281 Doug Ross Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:50:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580281 "At the New Yorker, Jane Mayer asks why any of this ended up becoming public, if Petraeus broke no rules." Obviously, Ms. Mayer knows nothing about the requirements for maintaining security clearances, the opportunities for leverage/blackmail, and clandestine sexual operations. Which is par for the course for The New Yorker. “At the New Yorker, Jane Mayer asks why any of this ended up becoming public, if Petraeus broke no rules.”
Obviously, Ms. Mayer knows nothing about the requirements for maintaining security clearances, the opportunities for leverage/blackmail, and clandestine sexual operations.

Which is par for the course for The New Yorker.

]]> By: Speakatus Sparkatus http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580262 Speakatus Sparkatus Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:19:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580262  Seems like there are several news stories in the shadows: 1. From what's been reported, it doesn't seem like the initial half-dozen emails Kelley received were worthy of an FBI investigation, much less an extended one. What was the initial federal crime again? Other than misappropriation of resources by Kelley's FBI friends? 2. How did they get metadata of *other* email accounts? 3. Once they found out who was actually sending the emails to Kelley, how come charges weren't filed? Wasn't that the point of opening the investigation? 4. Were CIA agents really holding Libyans? 5. Who leaked details of an investigation to Legislators? Hasn't Obama's been the most anti-whistleblower administration in forever?  Seems like there are several news stories in the shadows:
1. From what’s been reported, it doesn’t seem like the initial half-dozen emails Kelley received were worthy of an FBI investigation, much less an extended one. What was the initial federal crime again? Other than misappropriation of resources by Kelley’s FBI friends?
2. How did they get metadata of *other* email accounts?
3. Once they found out who was actually sending the emails to Kelley, how come charges weren’t filed? Wasn’t that the point of opening the investigation?
4. Were CIA agents really holding Libyans?
5. Who leaked details of an investigation to Legislators? Hasn’t Obama’s been the most anti-whistleblower administration in forever?

]]> By: royaltrux http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580248 royaltrux Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:00:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580248  I think she was referring to the public at large.  I think she was referring to the public at large.

]]> By: Paul Renault http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580229 Paul Renault Mon, 12 Nov 2012 13:21:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580229  I was hoping that someone would be raising suspicions here.  Was the affair publicized so that Petraeus would end up not testifying before Congress?  Cherchez la femme, eh?  I was hoping that someone would be raising suspicions here. 

Was the affair publicized so that Petraeus would end up not testifying before Congress?  Cherchez la femme, eh?

]]> By: sqyntz http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580226 sqyntz Mon, 12 Nov 2012 13:19:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580226 after seeing that photo, i'd like to know the backstory on all of those beads after seeing that photo, i’d like to know the backstory on all of those beads

]]> By: shawn feller http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580211 shawn feller Mon, 12 Nov 2012 12:47:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580211 When I found out the other person was no other then "Jill Kelley" I was really interested now...then I found out it was NOT Jill Kelley the porn star and got bored... When I found out the other person was no other then “Jill Kelley” I was really interested now…then I found out it was NOT Jill Kelley the porn star and got bored…

]]> By: tristan eldritch http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580198 tristan eldritch Mon, 12 Nov 2012 12:02:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580198 Hell, in the right lighting conditions, I can turn the Tampa amp up to 11 myself. Hell, in the right lighting conditions, I can turn the Tampa amp up to 11 myself.

]]> By: MrJM http://boingboing.net/2012/11/11/laffaire-petraeus-the-other.html#comment-1580192 MrJM Mon, 12 Nov 2012 11:46:00 +0000 http://boingboing.net/?p=193461#comment-1580192 <strong>If Boing-Boing doesn't offer "I'm a Tampa 10" tee-shirts, you guys will have really missed an opportunity.</strong> If Boing-Boing doesn’t offer “I’m a Tampa 10″ tee-shirts, you guys will have really missed an opportunity.

]]>