All language subtitles for cyberwar.s01e10.720p.hdtv.x264-w4f_Track02

BEN: A series of terrorist
attacks by the Islamic State.

Hacktivists fight back...

VOICE: ISIS, you will
be treated like a virus,

and we are the cure.

BEN: ...and ally
themselves with governments.

Individuals passing information
to the US government

is a longstanding practice.

But is the war on ISIS
causing a war within Anonymous?

♪

(Yelling)

For more than two years,
the so-called Islamic State

has been waging war
in Iraq and Syria.

ISIS members and fanboys
on Twitter and YouTube

spread propaganda...

(Speaking foreign language)

...while others deface websites

and penetrate
networks for intel.

One IS hacker and British expat
named Junaid Hussain was such

a threat, the CIA placed
him #3 on its kill list

before a drone strike in Syria
eventually killed him in 2015.

I first reported on
Anonymous' anti-ISIS campaign

in the summer of 2014,
but after the Paris attacks

a year later, the hacktivist
collective issued a declaration.

Members of Anonymous
had been taking down

Islamic State websites, flagging
Twitter accounts for removal,

hacking targets, and of course
generally just trolling ISIS.

But some members are actively
collaborating with governments,

and that tactic has caused a
major rift in the collective.

It also raises questions
about the thin line

governments are walking
when it comes to cooperation

with online vigilantes.

I'm at Speaker's Corner in
London to meet Nafees Hamid,

an expert on terrorism
and Islamic radicalization.

Speaker's Corner has this
history of freedom of speech.

People can get up there
on their soap box

and basically talk about
whatever they want to.

Including people
who support ISIS?

Yeah, they can't say
they support ISIS,

but they can basically support
all the goals of ISIS.

They can support the Caliphate,
they can reject democracy.

Nafees is a researcher who
focuses on the psychology

of terrorism, and he's
interviewed dozens of

ISIS sympathizers and
fighters across Europe.

I wanted to better
understand the effectiveness

of the Islamic State's
online operations.

So let's talk about recruitment,
but specifically social media.

Alright.

So how does something
like a YouTube video

influence some kid
who's in Birmingham

to pick up and head to
the Islamic Caliphate?

Usually when someone goes
online, goes on Twitter,

and let's say make an effort
to reach out to someone

who's either an ISIS supporter,
an active member of ISIS,

they follow them or they
tweet them or something,

and in a very short
amount of time they're just

all of a sudden surrounded
by all these supporters.

Like sometimes thousands of
people in a matter of hours

will just start following a
particular individual who just

posted a video or made contact
with someone in the group.

And then you just wanna inundate
that person's Twitter wall

with all sorts of videos of
what's going on in Syria.

And then in the midst of all of
that horror that they're seeing

coming from the Shia
militias, from the regimes,

from the impotence of
Western countries to step in,

then they'll see an ISIS
propaganda video that shows

an Iraqi soldier being
beheaded or killed.

And that kind of gives them
some kind of catharsis.

That gives them a
feeling of revenge.

It makes them seem like heroes.

(Yelling)

And it used to be pretty easy
to reach out online

and contact bonafide ISIS
operators in Iraq or Syria.

In fact, my chats with one
alleged IS operative from Canada

landed me in court.

The Canadian feds
wanted me to fork over

all of my communications
with Farrah Mohammed Shirdan.

(Speaking foreign language)

That case is ongoing,

and I'm still facing
the threat of jail time.

These ISIS operatives,
I mean, for a little while,

they weren't that hard
to find either.

They're just like a
Twitter link away really,

and they would even attach
their... you know, whether

it was Kik or a different
encrypted chat network name.

And then you'd just download
the app, contact them.

Exactly, yeah, it was
super easy to talk to them.

It was kind of out in the open.

I think from an intelligence
agency point of view,

this probably
served some purpose

because you could
monitor some of this stuff.

It might be a bit harder now

to contact members of ISIS
online, but a few years ago

when they were still out in
the open, the US government

decided to fight fire with
shoddy social media fire.

We noticed that in 2013,
there was an increase

in terrorist propaganda
in English.

And no one in the world,
not just the US,

had ever done anything
to try to address this.

Alberto Fernandez
was a US diplomat

for more than three decades.

A fluent Arabic speaker, he led
the State Department's program

to counteract ISIS
messaging online.

His group produced anti-ISIS
videos in many languages.

I remember being baffled when
their English language campaign

known as Think Again Turn Away
launched online in 2013.

Why don't you tell me
about Think Again Turn Away?

Think Again Turn Away was
basically a kind of cheap,

zero budget effort to address
the rise of ISIS propaganda

in foreign languages,
including English.

(Audience gasping)

What the ---- are you doing?

(Audience laughing)

The State Department
has genuinely created

a sarcastic parody recruitment
video for ISIS that begins

with the words, "Run,
do not walk to ISIS Land."

And you are banking a lot
on any potential militants

understanding that
that is sarcasm.

Oh, you know what?

I was just about to join ISIS,

but then I saw your
very clever video!

The criticism that people
have had is ridiculous,

that somehow trolling
with these people

brings us down to their level.

To some way it does.

Well, the problem with this is
that they've had free reign

for years, where
nobody said a thing.

How did that work out?

What do you think about
Anonymous and their operations

against these accounts?

Certainly the idea
of having more entities

going after the adversary's
material is a good thing.

That's what ISIS has, right?

ISIS has... ISIS
people doing stuff,

and then it has fanboys.

All over the world.

You need a network
to fight a network.

You need a swarm
to fight a swarm.

And Anonymous is
part of that swarm?

It should be, yes.

BEN: I'm in Toronto to meet
with an anti-ISIS activist

who calls herself Sneaker.

She joined a group
called GhostSec in 2015.

She basically combs the
internet and dark web,

collecting intel on ISIS,
and assessing whether

that information should be
passed to the authorities.

Because Anonymous is such
a loosely connected group,

there are often divisions within
the hacktivist collective.

And many Anons condemn
GhostSec's collaboration

with governments, but
Sneaker sees herself

as a member of both groups.

She was reluctant
to talk to us at first,

but finally agreed to
meet if we promised

not to reveal any of
her personal details,

and if she could wear
that white mask you're seeing.

We just want to help as
many people as we can.

What motivates you
every day to get up and...

what, you just wanna
hunt terrorists?

Every attack that we've had,
whether it's Paris or Belgium

or, you know, one of the
US attacks - San Bernadino -

and not only the deaths,
but you know,

they're enslaving little girls,
the way they treat people

in the Caliphate including
children, is what does it.

I mean, we have to do something.

So GhostSec is working with
the FBI and the US government?

- Well, not--
- And also with Anonymous?

Well, we are Anonymous.

Yeah, we're part of Anonymous,

but we don't have a
formal arrangement.

We simply send them the intel,
like any citizen, you know,

who's thought something's
suspicious, and they might call.

So that's all we're doing.

How do you feel about some
people in Anonymous who think

you guys are just being
rats to the government?

You know, if we come across
something that's going to

thwart an attack,
save somebody's life,

you want us to just
sit on the information

and not share it
with the government?

I mean, it doesn't
make any sense.

The government
just isn't able to do

as much as they should,
so we're just helping out.

And you do think you are
doing something they can't do?

We know that for a fact.

So how do anti-ISIS activists

get their information
to the authorities?

Michael Smith is a
counter-terrorism advisor

to Congress.

He once acted as the middle man

between Sneaker's group
and the government.

But infighting within
GhostSec led to another split,

and now Smith only deals
with the newest faction,

known as Ghost Security Group,

which confusingly sounds a lot
like the original group's name.

They reached out to me because
they were interested in finding

somebody who might be able to
determine whether or not some of

the information that they were
collecting could be utilized

for counter-terrorism
operational purposes.

And honestly, I thought well,

okay, let's just see what it is
that they're picking up on.

I knew that they were touting
that they were instrumental

in closing tens of thousands of
Islamic State-managed accounts

on Twitter and elsewhere
in social media.

And very quickly they
demonstrated that they were

drilling down into these
networks in ways that were

helping to gather information
about recruitment programs,

and in some cases
even attack plots

in various places in the world.

A notable example of that was
a plot to strike in Tunisia

around the 4th of
July last year.

Tunisia, but has
it only been Tunisia?

And was that plot
actually stopped?

Well, the plot was
stopped, certainly.

I received some indication that
the information was useful in

helping to identify a cell and
some planned activity there.

There have been other examples,

but I can't really get into
the specifics of that.

So wait, you get
this information, okay,

and then who do you pass it to?

Do you have a speed
dial for the FBI?

Well, I know people
in different agencies

and have points of contact.

And historically I would
look at the information

and say alright, based on...
let's say Tunisia,

where is that going
to be most appropriate

in terms of the flow
of information?

Ghost Security,
are they doing things

that the government can't,
that the NSA can't?

'Cause they'll claim they are.

You're having
trouble with that one.

(Laughing)

Well, what's different with
Ghost Security Group is that

they're not answering
to masters in government.

They can go out and do things
that perhaps would require

a lot more time and energy
just to develop approvals

and policies and even
just basic protocols

for various agencies to
pursue that type of activity.

So that's a great
little situation

if you're the US government.

You can let some guys
go off, or hackers,

and pretty much do
what they want unchained,

and then also get the
intelligence from it.

Well, I guess in theory.

Strange bedfellows,
is what I'm saying.

BEN: In 2015, Anonymous
declared war on ISIS.

The collective and various
subgroups have since taken down

ISIS websites and flagged
Twitter accounts for removal.

Some have even shared intel
with the US government.

But many Anonymous members
think that these tactics

violate the collective's
core beliefs.

Discordian is one of Anonymous'
most influential voices.

He's an OG Anon, and the brains
behind some of the group's

most iconic videos.

He skyped me from
somewhere in Europe.

You joined in 2010, and
you were around in 2011,

which was really the heyday.

What did Anonymous mean then?

Now Anonymous is kind of almost
working with the government.

Some of their sects are feeding
things to the government.

So I know obviously you
don't like this operation

against ISIS, but
can you describe to me

how deep the division
really is within Anonymous?

But I mean, if I can
play devil's advocate,

is it really so bad that
Anonymous is going after

a group that mass beheads
individuals, uses sex slaves?

Should ISIS even be
censored at all?

A lot of US officials talk about
the battle for hearts and minds

when it comes to
counter-terrorism.

Well, General David Petraeus
was one of the chief architects

of that exact strategy.

A military legend
with a scandalous fall,

he was commander of
the surge in Iraq,

commander of US forces
in Afghanistan,

and then the director
of the CIA.

Cyberspace, the internet,
this is a new battle space.

You know, we had ground
and then sea and air

and sub-sea and space,
and now you have cyberspace.

And increasingly, there are
battles being fought there.

These are battles of ideas,
and they have to be joined.

Anons like Discordian
believe that governments

working with Anonymous
are actively infiltrating

the hacktivist group.

General Petraeus doesn't talk
much about the CIA and Anonymous

publically, but he agreed to
meet me at his Manhattan office

to discuss this online war.

And I wasn't exactly
expecting him to be candid.

There are people who've said
that there's been a lot of

infiltration of a group like
Anonymous 'cause it's so open,

anyone can just join.

Was there a perspective in
the US intelligence community

that going after a
group like Anonymous

and getting inside of it
was a possibility?

Obviously not something I would
ever discuss, but nice try.

(Laughing)

What do you think about
something like Anonymous

going after ISIS online,
and then passing information

to the US government?

Well, individuals passing
information to the US government

is a longstanding practice.

This is why we have tip lines.

But we have to be very,
very careful, because

just as we did not allow
vigilantism or illegal activity

on the ground when we partnered
with individuals who used to

either tacitly or even
actively oppose us,

you can't allow certain
activities in cyberspace.

You certainly can't promote
them, even just because

they may be aligned with our
interests or our objectives.

So they have to be used
very, very carefully, I think,

if they are used at all.

And I think that the law
enforcement organizations and

the intelligence agencies have
been very careful, in fact,

in their relationships
with such groups.

Some people within Anonymous
that we've spoken to say

that the US government
isn't doing enough,

and it forced them to intervene.

Do you think that that's true?

I don't think you'd find an
argument in the US government

about whether or not
more should be done.

There are always
limits, however.

There's never been a
general who had enough troops,

enough funding,
enough bandwidth,

now enough unmanned
aerial vehicles,

and the same is true when
it comes to cyberspace.

BEN: The online battle
between ISIS and Anonymous

has created unusual alliances
and deep divisions within

the hacktivist collective.

Some Anons believe collaborating
with governments is snitching,

but others are willing
to do whatever it takes

to fight the terror group.

Mikro initially joined
Anonymous to fight ISIS,

and then he started his
own group called CtrlSec.

He devised a way to
crowdsource the reporting

of suspected ISIS accounts
to Twitter en masse

so the company can
pull them down.

Are you saving lives,
do you think?

So in Tunisia, when you
knew the attack was coming,

what did you do
with the intelligence?

What was that moment like?

What do you think of
people who say that

CtrlSec or Anonymous
fighting ISIS this way,

you're kind of aligning with
the military industrial complex

and the goals of
the US government?

So how far is Anonymous straying
from its basic principles

in its fight against ISIS?

A hacker since
his teenage years,

Gregg Housh was part of a
notorious software piracy ring

until he was busted by the FBI.

After a stint in federal prison,

he became one of the original
members of Anonymous.

He's so old school,
he was in Anon before

the Guy Fawkes mask
was even a thing.

ISIS are a natural enemy of
what Anonymous stands for.

- And everybody else.
- If it stands for anything.

You know, freedom
is a big piece of it.

Anti-censorship is
another big piece of it.

You know, at the same time,

what about that
government collaboration?

'Cause you're a guy
who was a black hat hacker

in the criminal world, ran
away from the FBI for a while,

and now the thing
that you helped found

is now collaborating with the
very enemy that you once had.

A lot of Anons don't agree

with working with the
government at all on this.

You know, write it up
to them being right,

which I think: write it up
to them being mad about

all their friends
who are in jail.

I mean, you're a
collaborator at that point.

Yeah, at that point you're
a collaborator with someone

who has shown themselves
to be, you know,

mostly the enemy
to people like you.

But just because Gregg
opposes collaboration

with the government, it
doesn't mean he opposes

the direct confrontation
with ISIS.

So if you look at the
stuff that CtrlSec is doing,

GhostSec, Op Ice ISIS, what
does it all mean in the end?

Is it actually
achieving anything?

So this is a question
I get asked a lot,

"What do you hope to achieve?

What in the grand scheme
of things did this do?"

Maybe there would've been
more attacks in other countries,

'cause you know, the recruiters
online that were shut down

by Anonymous would have
reached people that were

ready and willing, if they
had only been talked to.

If one bomb didn't go off
because of what Anonymous did,

then victory.

But the other angle is
the continuing activation

of young people.

When you see acts like this,
you see the world is currently

in a terrible state.

There's a lot that needs to get
done, and you don't have to have

12 years of college
and be a senator.

You don't have to be
someone in a position of power.

You can be sitting at home
and affecting the world.

Anonymous is challenging the
online operations of one of

the most prolific terrorist
organizations on Earth,

trying to do real damage.

The campaign has
raised questions about

how the government cooperates
with online vigilantes.

But whether or not its
operations are doing anything

to stop ISIS, the campaign
has definitely taken its toll

on Anonymous itself.

And some members are asking

if the collective will
ever be the same again.