348 lines
18 KiB
Plaintext
348 lines
18 KiB
Plaintext
Intelligence and Interrogation Processes
|
|
By: Master Of Impact and the Legion Of Hackers
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION:
|
|
=============
|
|
|
|
Doing what we do best always carries the risk of someone, somewhere, wanting
|
|
to hold you for questioning. In this article I hope to give those persons who
|
|
that are in use (and are in no ways happen to be all new), that can give you
|
|
the edge you need to come away "sin faulta". In fact, these interrogation
|
|
practicies are used a lot by teachers, local police, the FBI and Secret Service
|
|
girlfriends, wives, parents, etc. to obtain information from you that you
|
|
probably don't want to give out.
|
|
|
|
Interrogation is the art of questioning and examining a source in order to
|
|
obtain the maximum amount of useful information. The goal of any interrogation is to obtain useful and reliable information in a lawful manner and in a
|
|
minimum amount of time. The goal of any source is to deceive or hinder any
|
|
attempts of the interrogator to get information out of him.
|
|
|
|
This article will deal primarily with the principles, techniques, and
|
|
procedures of intelligence interrogation. By reading this article, one
|
|
who runs the risk of being interrogated can build countermeasures for common
|
|
interrogation techniques. This article has some paraphrased material from a
|
|
government interrogation manual but the majority of the information was from
|
|
personal experience and prior knowledge of the subject.
|
|
|
|
You cannot hope to defeat interrogation techniques unless you first know
|
|
what they are. The ones listed herein are the most commonly used. After reading
|
|
this article, you should be able to tell when you are being interrogated by
|
|
people, and what technique(s) they are using when you probably would not have
|
|
known before. Once you know what they are up to and how they are going to TRY
|
|
to accomplish it, YOU have the initiative!
|
|
|
|
|
|
INITIATIVE:
|
|
===========
|
|
|
|
Achieving and maintaining the initiative is essential to a successful
|
|
interrogation just as offense is the key to success in combat operations. The
|
|
initiative in any interrogation must rest with the interrogator throughout the
|
|
entire interrogation. He will have certain advantages at the beginning of an
|
|
interrogation which will enable him to grasp the initiative and assist in
|
|
maintaining the initiative throughout the interrogation.
|
|
|
|
The interrogator has a position of authority over you. You realize this
|
|
fact, and in some cases, believe that your future might well depend upon your
|
|
association with the interrogator. As in the case of police questioning,
|
|
"cooperate and we will go easy on you". Like hell they will.
|
|
|
|
The interrogator knows the purpose of the interrogation; the source does
|
|
not necessarily know the exact reason, but can generally assume (especially
|
|
in the case of a computer hacker or phone phreak, which is what the term
|
|
"source" will be referring to, during this article) because he or she is most
|
|
usually conscious of horrible and nasty wrong-doings he or she may have been
|
|
responsible for. Unfortunately for the source, he is generally very much in
|
|
the dark about what's happening to his life while it is, in fact, crumbling
|
|
around him (temporarily, anyway). This gives the source a not-so-illusionary
|
|
behavior pattern of the proverbial chicken who's had its head chopped off.
|
|
|
|
Having gained the initial advantage which is quite an understatement,
|
|
seeing that, although the risks to the source during the perpetration of
|
|
a crime are quite obvious, the possible realistic results of being caught
|
|
aren't quite as impressive while one is getting away with a crime than when
|
|
one's home is invaded by the JC Penny-suit men wearing mirrored sunglasses,
|
|
the interrogator must strive to maintain the initiative applying appropriate
|
|
interrogation techniques through the exercise of self-control; by taking
|
|
advantage of the source's weaknesses as they become apparent; and by
|
|
continuously displaying an attitude of confidence and self-assurance. The
|
|
interrogator, however, is 'supposed' to never take advantage of your weaknesses
|
|
to`tae extent that the interrogation involves threats, insults, torture
|
|
or exposure to unpleasant or inhumane treatment of any kind. Remember, the
|
|
keyword is supposed.
|
|
|
|
It is possible for the interrogator to lose the initiative during the
|
|
interrogation of a source. If this should occur, he will probably postpone the
|
|
interrogation and reassess the situation. If the interrogation is resumed, a
|
|
different interrogator will probably be introduced. Following are some examples
|
|
of loss of initiative:
|
|
|
|
* The interrogator becomes angry and completely loses his self-control because
|
|
of the arrogant actions of the source (such as the unbuttoning of a jacket
|
|
to reveal "Secret Service Sucks" spray painted onto the source's T-shirt.)
|
|
As a result, the interrogator loses sight of his objective and concentrates
|
|
his efforts on humbling the source.
|
|
|
|
* During the interrogation the interrogator fails to note significant
|
|
discrepancies in the source's story. The interrogator may lose his initiative
|
|
as the source gains confidence from his success and resorts to further
|
|
deception, leading the interrogator away from his objective.
|
|
|
|
* The interrogator becomes overly friendly with the source and allows him to
|
|
lead the interrogation. The source reports only what he believes to be
|
|
important and neglects several significant items of info which could have
|
|
been obtained had the interrogator maintained the initiative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
PHASES OF INTERROGATION:
|
|
========================
|
|
|
|
Approach Phase:
|
|
---------------
|
|
|
|
Regardless of the type of source you are and your outward personality, you
|
|
do possess weaknesses which, if recognized by the interrogator, can be
|
|
exploited. A human being is likely to:
|
|
|
|
o Talk, especially after harrowing experiences
|
|
o Show deference when confronted by superior authority
|
|
o Rationalize acts about which he feels guilty
|
|
o Lack the ability to apply or to remember lessons he may have been
|
|
taught regarding security if confronted with a disorganized or a
|
|
strange situation.
|
|
o Cooperate with those who have control over him
|
|
o Attach less importance to a topic which the interrogator demonstrates
|
|
identical or related experiences and knowledge
|
|
o Appreciate flattery and exoneration from guilt
|
|
o Cooperate readily when given material rewards
|
|
o Cooperate readily when treated as an equal
|
|
|
|
|
|
TECHNIQUES:
|
|
===========
|
|
|
|
"File and Dossier"
|
|
----------------
|
|
|
|
The interrogator prepares a dossier containing all available info obtained
|
|
from records and docs concerning you. Careful arrangement of the material with-
|
|
in the file may give the illusion that it contains more data than is actually
|
|
there. The file may be "padded" with extra paper, if necessary. Index tabs with
|
|
titles such as "education", "employment", "criminal record", "bulletin boards",
|
|
"violated computer systems", and others are particularly effective for this
|
|
purpose. The interrogtor will confront you with the dossier at the beginning of
|
|
the interrogation and explain that "intelligence" has provided a complete
|
|
record of every significant happening in your life; therefore, it would
|
|
be useless to resist interrogation. The interrogator may read a few selected
|
|
bits of known data to further impress you. If the technique is successful, you
|
|
will be impressed with and more importantly, terrified by the "voluminous"
|
|
file, conclude that everything is known, and resign to complete cooperation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"We know ALL"
|
|
-----------
|
|
|
|
This technique may be employed in conjunction with the above or by itself.
|
|
The interrogator must first become thoroughly familiar with the available data
|
|
concerning you. To begin the interrogation, the interrogator asks questions
|
|
based on his known data. When you hesitate, refuse to answer, or provide an
|
|
incomplete or incorrect reply, the interrogator himself provides the detailed
|
|
answer. Through the careful use of the limited number of known details, the
|
|
interrogator may convince you that all the info is already known; therefore,
|
|
your answers to the questions are of no consequence. When you begin to give
|
|
accurate and complete information, the interrogator interjects questions
|
|
designed to gain the needed info. Questions to which answers are already known
|
|
are also asked to test you and to maintain the deception that all the info is
|
|
already known. A VERY effective technique I might add.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Rapid Fire
|
|
|
|
This approach technique involves a psychological ploy based on the principles
|
|
that:
|
|
|
|
* Everyone likes to be heard when they speak; and
|
|
|
|
* It is confusing to be interrupted in mid-sentence with an unrelated
|
|
question.
|
|
|
|
This technique may be used with one, or simultaneously by two or more
|
|
interrogators in questioning the same source. In employing this technique the
|
|
interrogator asks a series of questions in such a manner that you do not have
|
|
time to answer a question completely before the next question is asked. This
|
|
tends to confuse you and you are apt to contradict yourself, as you have little
|
|
time to prepare your answers. The interrogator then confronts you with the
|
|
inconsistencies, causing further contradictions. In many instances you
|
|
will begin to talk freely in an attempt to explain yourself and deny the
|
|
inconsistencies pointed out by the interrogator. In attempting to explain your
|
|
answers, you are likely to reveal more than you intend, thus creating
|
|
additional leads for the interrogator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Mutt and Jeff"
|
|
-------------
|
|
|
|
This technique involves a psychological ploy which takes advantage of the
|
|
natural uncertainty and guilt which a source has as a result of being detained
|
|
and questioned. Use of this technique necessitates the employment of two
|
|
experienced interrogators who are convincing as actors. Basically, the two
|
|
interrogators will display opposing personalities and attitudes towards you.
|
|
For example the first interrogator is very formal and displays an unsympathetic
|
|
attitude. This is to make you feel cut off from your friends. At the time when
|
|
you act hopeless and alone, the second interrogator appears (having received
|
|
his cue by a signal, and is hidden from you), scolds the first interrogator for
|
|
his harsh behavior and orders him from the room. He then apologizes to soothe
|
|
you, perhaps offering coffee and a cigarette. He explains that the actions of
|
|
the first interrogator were largely the result of an inferior intellect and
|
|
lack of human sensitivity. The inference is created that the other interrogator
|
|
and you have in common a high degree of intelligence and an awareness of human
|
|
sensitivity, above and beyond that of the first interrogator. You are normally
|
|
inclined to have a feeling of gratitude towards the second interrogator, who
|
|
continues to show a sympathetic attitude in an effort to increase the rapport
|
|
and control for the questioning which will follow. Should your cooperativeness
|
|
begin to fade, the second interrogator can hint that since he is of high rank,
|
|
having many other duties, he cannot afford to waste time on an uncooperative
|
|
source. He may broadly infer that the first interrogator might return to
|
|
continue the questioning. When used against the proper source, this trick will
|
|
normally gain complete cooperation for the interrogation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Repetition"
|
|
----------
|
|
|
|
Repetition is used to induce cooperation from a hostile source. The inter-
|
|
rogator listens carefully to your answer to a question, and then repeats both
|
|
the question and answer several times. He does this with each succeeding
|
|
question until you become so bored with the procedure that you answer the
|
|
question fully and truthfully to satisfy the interrogator and to gain relief
|
|
from the monotony of this method of questioning. The repetition technique will
|
|
generally not work when employed against introverted sources or those having
|
|
great self control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Pride and Ego"
|
|
-------------
|
|
|
|
This technique works effectively on many phreaks and hackers due to the fact
|
|
that many are so damn egotistical. The strategy is to trick you into revealing
|
|
desired information by flattering you. It is effective with sources who have
|
|
displayed weaknesses or feelings of inferiority. The interrogator accuses you
|
|
of weakness or implies that you are unable to do a certain thing. The proud or
|
|
egotistical source will jump to the defensive. An example of an opening
|
|
question for this technique may be: "Why would you own a blue box when you
|
|
have absolutely no idea how to use one?" or, "Why do you hack VMS systems if
|
|
you can't do a damn thing once you're inside of one?" It provides you with the
|
|
opportunity to show someone that you have "brains" and in doing so, you give
|
|
the interrogator more information than you should have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Silent"
|
|
------
|
|
|
|
The Silent technique may be successful when used against either the nervous,
|
|
or the confident-type source. When employing this technique, the interrogator
|
|
says nothing to you, but looks you squarely in the eye, probably with a slight
|
|
smile on his face. It is important for the interrogator not to look away from
|
|
you, but force you to break eye contact first. You will become nervous, begin
|
|
to shift around in your chair, and look away. If you ask questions the
|
|
interrogator probably will not answer them until he is ready to break the
|
|
silence. A source may blurt out questions such as, "What the hell do you want
|
|
with me". When the interrogator is ready to break the silence, he may do so
|
|
with some quite nonchalant questions such as, "You've been logging on to our
|
|
system for a long time now, haven't you? Did you hack the passwords yourself?".
|
|
|
|
In some cases the interrogator will use several approach techniques
|
|
concurrently, or in succession.
|
|
|
|
|
|
QUESTIONS:
|
|
==========
|
|
|
|
There are various questions that the interrogator may ask you:
|
|
|
|
* Prepared questions: When the topic under inquiry is very technical or when
|
|
legal aspects of the interrogation require preciseness, the interrogator will
|
|
have a list of prepared questions to follow during the interrogation.
|
|
|
|
* Control questions: To maintain control and to check on the truthfulness of
|
|
a source, the normal questions will be mixed with control questions-those
|
|
with known answers. If you fail to answer these questions, or answer wrong,
|
|
it will indicate that you are either not knowledgeable in the topic or that
|
|
you are lying.
|
|
|
|
* Nonpertinent questions: Sometimes it is necessary for the interrogator to
|
|
keep the true objective of the interrogation from you. By carefully blending
|
|
pertinent questions with nonpertinent questions, the interrogator can conceal
|
|
the true purpose of the inquiry.
|
|
|
|
* Direct and leading questions: The manner in which the questions are worded
|
|
has a direct bearing on your response. A question may be posed in a number
|
|
of ways:
|
|
|
|
o "What system did you hack into on 11/11/86?"
|
|
|
|
o "Did you break into General Dynamics' computer on 11/11/86?"
|
|
|
|
o "You did break into GD's computer on 11/11/86?"
|
|
|
|
o "You didn't break into GD'S computer on 11/11/86, did you?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PSYCHOLOGY IN INTERROGATION:
|
|
============================
|
|
|
|
The interrogator will watch for various psychological responses from you during
|
|
an interrogation. Some of these are:
|
|
|
|
* Rationalization: Creating plausible excuses or explanations for one's acts
|
|
without being aware that these excuses or explanations are way off the
|
|
[obvious] reality.
|
|
|
|
* Identification: To identify with and mimic a mental image of some one
|
|
important to you.
|
|
|
|
* Compensation: Trying to make up for a psychological weakness by building
|
|
up or exaggerating a psychological strength.
|
|
|
|
* Exhibitionism: Showing off, bragging, etc.
|
|
|
|
* Fear, Anger, Frustration, etc.
|
|
|
|
Of course when being interrogated, you should remain as emotionless as possible
|
|
and never show anger, or get upset (NEVER inflict physical abuse upon the
|
|
unsuspecting interrogator. This only creates tension between both the inter-
|
|
rogator and yourself). Your every move, every response, every action is noted
|
|
and used by the interrogator to get you to screw up and give him what he wants.
|
|
|
|
There can be two main objectives that you can obtain when being interrogated.
|
|
The first is to find ways to force the interrogator to lose his initiative. You
|
|
can do this in many ways. A few that come to mind are: Repeat everything the
|
|
interrogator says. Mimic the interrogator. Laugh at the interrogator. Basically
|
|
piss the interrogator off and make him so mad that he loses sight of his
|
|
objective. This may however, get you in deeper trouble, but it may give you
|
|
extra time while another interrogator is found.
|
|
|
|
Lie like hell to the interrogator and piss him off. Such as the pathological
|
|
liar gimmick: "I broke into the NSA's computer, yeah, and then used their
|
|
network to get into the presidents private computer yeah that's it, the
|
|
password was uh...Bonzo, yeah, and then used it to take control of a satellite
|
|
used for Star Wars, and made it land right on top of the Kremlin, yeah that's
|
|
the ticket!"
|
|
|
|
You can also change the subject over and over again to totally unrelated things
|
|
such as: its a nice day out today, hows the wife and kids, how about some food,
|
|
who do you think is going to the superbowl, etc.
|
|
|
|
The other and probably better objective is simply to pretend to fall for any of
|
|
the various techniques used against you and feed the interrogator more and more
|
|
bullshit, of course being very sincere. This way he gets totally bogus
|
|
information while thinking you are cooperating fully.
|
|
|
|
Well, I hope you never have to put this article to use in a legal manner, but
|
|
you would be surprised how everyday you are interrogated without even
|
|
realizing it by normal people who probably don't realize they are interrogating
|
|
you!
|
|
|