Prejudice

Home » War, weapon, armed forces etc. » Scorpene leak 2

Scorpene leak 2

Recent Posts: Prejudice

Is altering signature on cheque a material alteration of the cheque?

Is altering signature on cheque a material alteration of the cheque?

In Aldons v. Cornwall, a material alteration to a negotiable instrument was defined as “an alteration, which alters the business effect of the instrument if used for any business purpose. Example: Date, The time of payment, The place of payment, The sum of payment, The number of parties, The relationship between the parties, Legal character […]

Liability associated with Personally Identifiable Information (PII) in organizational and Business setup

Liability associated with Personally Identifiable Information (PII) in organizational and Business setup

Lately we have been analysing issues related to management of Personally Identifiable Information (hereinafter PII), in an organizational and business setup. There are a lot of PII issues involved in running a business or organization that are not even considered while dealing with the idea of PII in Law. Here are some of the things […]

Understanding section 24 an 25 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Understanding section 24 an 25 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

This may be by far the most legal prejudice we have posted. But it deliberates upon important aspect of law relating to maintenance of spouse and child during the pendency of trial. We hope you enjoy reading this and god forbid, but if need ever be, you could use this for furtherance of your cause. […]

Rationalizing proliferation with respect to net neutrality

Rationalizing proliferation with respect to net neutrality

Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favouring or blocking particular products or websites. The principle objective of net neutrality is that “all the Internet traffic has to be treated equally without any discrimination”; but this has had different […]

North Korea’s Nuclear Test (Prejudice)

North Korea’s Nuclear Test (Prejudice)

On Friday, 9th of September North Korea conducted a nuclear test for the fifth time on the country’s National Day. The only difference is that this time it was successful and much more powerful. This had led to outrage all over the world, with many leaders reacting angrily. China opposed the test, with South Korea […]

In this post I will be looking at answers to one of the three material questions raised in the previous posts. As far as the question of who is responsible for data leak is concerned, there are different theories. Indian authorities and Australian newspaper that published the data, claim that the data is believed to have been “removed” from the firm in Paris in 2011 by a former French Navy officer. The officer, who worked as a subcontractor for DCNS, and a French colleague took the data to a Southeast Asian country where they were employed by a private company run by a Western businessman.

It is also said that after the two Frenchmen were sacked by the Southeast Asian firm, the secret data was sent to the company’s head office in Singapore and chances are that it could have been stolen then. The data was also placed on a server of the same firm on April 18, 2013, and it was “dangerously vulnerable to hacking or interception by a foreign intelligence service. Further, it is not known whether the data stayed on this server for a few days or for a year.”

Another theory suggests a possibility of data being hacked by a hacking group or perhaps a standalone activist hacker. This theory is backed the idea that government agencies, Mazagon Docks in this case, do not have a well-protected cyber defense system. Considering this fact, it is perhaps a possibility that the data could have been stolen from Indian servers.

The most recent revelations by ‘The Australian’ suggest the high probability of data leak by French company’s sub-contractors. In the re-construction of entire events leading to data leak, the Australian daily writes that the data on Scorpene was removed from the server as a reference guide for the former French naval officer’s new job in a Southeast Asian country. However, at a later stage the French naval officer fell out with the Southeast Asian private company. Despite of the fallout, Southeast Asian private firm continued to hold onto the data. Thereafter the data was sent by disk to a man in Sydney. Evidence suggests that data was not even encrypted then. The man in Sydney transferred it to an encrypted disk and “wiped the old disk with special software, grabbed a hammer and smashed it to pieces in his backyard”. The man, who was not identified by The Australian, “placed the new encrypted disk in a locked filing cabinet in his office and there it remained for more than two years”.

When corroborated with other evidence, The Australian’s latest narrative appears to be the most appealing. Rest of the three possibilities appear to be less likely considering the fact that they are mere speculations and no concrete evidence has been found to back the same. Further, The Australians stand that it looks more incompetence than espionage is also well taken. This is in light of the latest revelations with respect to the chain of events involved in the incident and corroborating set of evidence backing the same.

In the next post I will analyse next question, which is whether what will be the implications of this leak and how to prevent them? Keep reading!

Advertisements

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: