From the reporting, it looks like they had official documents with an actual price list for various exploits, along with details about what they entailed ("rigged monitor cable", "USB nubs"). What exactly do you consider to be 'verified'? Alexander or Clapper standing up and owning up to it? Good luck with that...

A second source would by nice, at least.

This article appears to derive its facts entirely from the mystery catalogue. If, hypothetically, the catalogue was drawn up by a bored NSA intern as an April Fool's joke, this article doesn't provide any solid proof to dispute that notion.

There is little Jake Appelbaum (one of the listed authors of this piece) won't do or say for media attention and public credibility.

Documents would be plausible. "Trust us, we've read them" from someone widely known to lie and steal is another matter entirely.

Entirely unsubstantiated rumors on the internets suggest that Jake got a talk pulled this week from the CCC hacker conference presently underway in Hamburg (which he keynoted last year) that was due to explore his motives and relationship with the US government, as he is the only US citizen publicly affiliated with Wikileaks and has not yet been charged, arrested, or imprisoned (and Wikileaks has not really done anything damaging to the US government since CM/Cablegate).

Don't believe everything you read.

You've made a number of accusations toward Appelbaum, a well respected researcher, without providing any evidence. This generally is a sign that someone is acting in bad faith.

Care to provide sources, or does the person asking me not to believe everything I read expect me to take his claims on faith and "entirely unsubstantiated rumor"?

> a well respected researcher

He's only well respected outside of the security research community. Those inside know him better than that.

> This generally is a sign that someone is acting in bad faith.

Indeed, this is why many people directly affected by his harassment, backstabbing, and general underhanded techniques employed in his pursuit of fame and glory choose to ignore him rather than directly and publicly address his treachery.

Unfortunately, that means his past goes unreported.

I hold lay opinions of my reputation in little regard, so I (unlike many friends of mine) have no issue saying what I know.

It's all hearsay by the time it gets to you, though, as I'm the first hop away with many of these reports. I'm not interested in opening myself up to a libel suit.

For a general impression of his behavior, please go review his own posts on the noisebridge mailing list archives. Don't take my word for it.

He hasn't been charged or arrested per se, but he quite regularly talks about other forms of intimidation he undergoes. Laptops confiscated, apartment broken into, phone calls, border detainments.

Also, there were two other reporters who filed that story, and it is showing up in a reputable journalistic source - Der Spiegel. I am inclined to believe it, given the very specific details they have highlighted about TAO and ANT.

Citations please or you just come off as someone bitter who wants to diss on people.

Entirely unsubstantiated rumors suggest lots of things about sneak too. See how easy it is? :-)

I'm not interested in playing telephone or opening myself up to libel accusations.

I have direct accounts of his treachery and deceit.

By the time I tell you, the second hop, now they're rumor. See the problem?

So all we ask is for some proof. That's all. If there is proof, even if it is the second hop or the tenth hop, it doesn't matter.

Then why post anything at all?

Any links to substantiate the rumor that jake pulled a talk? More info please?

What motivation would he have to lie about documents also possessed by Glenn Greenwald and Barton Gellman? I'm sure Glenn would gleefully point out misinformation. And Ed Snowden is in constant contact with them.