Author Topic: Potential impact of leaked ULA emails criticising SpaceX and NASA  (Read 21657 times)

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6104
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9329
  • Likes Given: 39
Until ULA comes back with a more definitive response, I'm going to be wary of the complete authenticity of this leak, for two reasons:

1) It was released on a forum dedicated to sale of stolen data. However not only was it posted for free, it was not released as a 'teaser' of a larger leak of actual valuable data (e.g. proprietary information) that someone with access to ULA's internal emails would have access to. Even if access was only to the IAM side (as mentioned by launchwatcher) as a recipient, no other union emails that would have been available for copy were released or teased for sale.
2) It is also a highly targeted and curated collection of emails and documents on one very specific subject, rather than the sort of broad capture that would occur from a system-gated or access-time-gated leak or intrusion. Several similar highly targeted 'pro bono' leaks in the past (e.g. to Wikileaks among others) have been used to disseminate modified or falsified information mixed in with genuine information. It is possible that some portions of the email exchanges posted are genuine and others portions have been doctored or outright fabricated. Especially when genuine minor malfeasance has occurred, it is difficult to effectively message "staffer X did send [embarrassing email], but this particular sentence in this paragraph describing [more serious claim] was added afterwards".

ULAs response to Ars certainly indicates ULA believes that are not complete fabrications (or they would have released either an outright denial, or a straight 'no comment'), so they are likely taking to time to verify where the leak originated, and whether the emails and documents released all came from ULA unmodified or have been edited or fabricated.
It may well turn out to be a 100% unmodified genuine leak (either from the Union or someone with unauthorised access to their systems and a very specific agenda) but as it stands something about this stinks of a motivated third party.

tl;dr The answer to "are these emails/documents real or fake" could be "yes".
« Last Edit: 08/27/2021 12:05 pm by edzieba »

Offline freddo411

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Liked: 1197
  • Likes Given: 3417
But is it just a pissing match ? The theme of the discussion is to influence contract decision making at NASA and hamper Spx /space market competition. You have undue influence on NASA through the White House. Surely that must be of public and even legal interest. If Hasan conveyed the messages to WH staff that is criminal.

Yeah, "pissing match" doesn't properly describe it; maybe "playing grab-ass", or whatever your preference for describing ostensibly juvenile behavior lacking common sense. In any case, unclear how to connect the rest of your dots...

"Undue influence on NASA through the White House"? Certainly White House has influence with regards to NASA. What would constitute "undue" and why? Also, Hasan is a lobbyist (no secret). He gets paid for bending the ear of anyone in a position to advance his client's position, including those in Congress and the White House. How does that rise to the level of "criminal" and why?

edit: Asking why as those communications are almost entirely opinion, innuendo and mud-slinging with few-to-no facts.

The gist of the emails suggest that political WH officials should award contracts to ULA (or deny them to SX) regardless of merit or other requirements.  That would be illegal.  The BO legal suit is essentially claiming such a thing

The emails would be evidence of a conspiracy to commit such an impropriety.  I am not a lawyer, But I think this is a rather weak case without any other evidence


Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
The gist of the emails suggest that political WH officials should award contracts to ULA (or deny them to SX) regardless of merit or other requirements.  That would be illegal.  The BO legal suit is essentially claiming such a thing

The emails would be evidence of a conspiracy to commit such an impropriety.  I am not a lawyer, But I think this is a rather weak case without any other evidence

Many things may be suggested, but that does not make them a-priori illegal. Lobbyists, companies and industry groups do it all the time. Acting on such in a manner that contravenes the law is when it crosses the line. These emails are sorely lacking any evidence of such.

Question that "BO legal suit is essentially claiming such a thing". The filing is sealed so we do not know what Blue is claiming.

Also, would be very careful using the word "conspiracy". That is a loaded term and see no evidence of that in these emails. Again, a lot of innuendo and mud, but little more.

Agree that this is a "rather weak case"--or more properly, that no case exists based on these emails. IANAL, but don't see prima-facie what you would charge these people with; stupidity, innuendo and throwing mud? Unless an intrepid prosecutor or reporter pulled hard on those threads, and showed that they crossed the line into illegal activity, don't see this going anywhere.

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
...
tl;dr The answer to "are these emails/documents real or fake" could be "yes".

And if the answer is "yes"? What would it matter? ULA pushing an anti-SpaceX agenda? IAM pushing an anti-SpaceX agenda? Not to minimize the potential impact of these emails, but don't think that is news to anyone. That some individuals conducted a ham-fisted and stupid conversation which was captured and brought some of those anti-SpaceX efforts to light... yeah, that is a bit of news, but nothing that changes the basic calculus.
« Last Edit: 08/27/2021 04:21 pm by joek »

Online dglow

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Liked: 2295
  • Likes Given: 4433
Until ULA comes back with a more definitive response, I'm going to be wary of the complete authenticity of this leak, for two reasons:

1) It was released on a forum dedicated to sale of stolen data. However not only was it posted for free, it was not released as a 'teaser' of a larger leak of actual valuable data (e.g. proprietary information) that someone with access to ULA's internal emails would have access to.

Wait – we have no way of knowing whether or not this is “a ‘teaser’ of a larger leak”. ULA are being mum about it. For all we know the hacker(s) could be actively extorting them now, threatening the release of additional damaging materials and communication.

You are welcome, and very likely wise, to be skeptical about the authenticity of these materials. But the reasoning above is not a solid basis from which to reach that opinion IMO.

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6104
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 9329
  • Likes Given: 39
...
tl;dr The answer to "are these emails/documents real or fake" could be "yes".

And if the answer is "yes"?
Then it means the 'or' was an inclusive or rather than an exclusive or. Or in other words, that the leaked emails and documents can be a combination of both real and fake. Skilled lobbyists would know how to skirt right up to the line of acceptable when it comes to making claims and accusations against competitors. It would take very little modification to push those claims over that line.
Wait – we have no way of knowing whether or not this is “a ‘teaser’ of a larger leak”.
In the forum it was posted on, there was no offer of further data in exchange for payment. That is what I meant by it not being a teaser (or sample) for a wider range of data available for sale. If the leaker/intruder does indeed have access to more data, they are deliberately avoiding making a profit from it.  When it comes to corporate blackmail, proof of possession of information is generally through private channels rather than public ones (as once information is released it lowers in value).

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
...
tl;dr The answer to "are these emails/documents real or fake" could be "yes".
And if the answer is "yes"?
Then it means the 'or' was an inclusive or rather than an exclusive or. Or in other words, that the leaked emails and documents can be a combination of both real and fake. Skilled lobbyists would know how to skirt right up to the line of acceptable when it comes to making claims and accusations against competitors. It would take very little modification to push those claims over that line.
...

Assume the answer is "all are real". Not seeing how that changes the calculus?

Online launchwatcher

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 756
  • Liked: 726
  • Likes Given: 988
Wait – we have no way of knowing whether or not this is “a ‘teaser’ of a larger leak”. ULA are being mum about it. For all we know the hacker(s) could be actively extorting them now, threatening the release of additional damaging materials and communication.
As I wrote earlier, markings in the leaked messages suggest to me that it is is more likely to have leaked from the other end of the conversation (the union end), not from ULA.   I'm surprised that nobody reporting on this has mentioned asking the union about this.

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
As I wrote earlier, markings in the leaked messages suggest to me that it is is more likely to have leaked from the other end of the conversation (the union end), not from ULA.   I'm surprised that nobody reporting on this has mentioned asking the union about this.

Was also noted in other posts-forums, including the original poster (over on reddit) IIRC. Think the short answer is: It does not matter and no one cares. (Although expect conversations are ongoing between ULA and IAM as to IAM's security.)

If the contents of those communications are valid, so what? The anti-SpaceX position by ULA and IAM (among others) is no secret. The only thing these communications do is shine a bit more light on those activities--none of which appear to illegal.

Again, a lot of innuendo and mud-slinging, but nothing we have not seen before in more public venues (if not quite so bald-faced).

Online tssp_art

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 237
  • Fairfax Station, VA
  • Liked: 627
  • Likes Given: 440
As I wrote earlier, markings in the leaked messages suggest to me that it is is more likely to have leaked from the other end of the conversation (the union end), not from ULA.   I'm surprised that nobody reporting on this has mentioned asking the union about this.

Was also noted in other posts-forums, including the original poster (over on reddit) IIRC. Think the short answer is: It does not matter and no one cares. (Although expect conversations are ongoing between ULA and IAM as to IAM's security.)

If the contents of those communications are valid, so what? The anti-SpaceX position by ULA and IAM (among others) is no secret. The only thing these communications do is shine a bit more light on those activities--none of which appear to illegal.

Again, a lot of innuendo and mud-slinging, but nothing we have not seen before in more public venues (if not quite so bald-faced).

I largely agree with this assessment but if I were Tory, the slandering of NASA leadership, a major client for ULA, would require at least an apology and probably a sacrificial head - Robbie Sabathier would have to go.

Offline RoadWithoutEnd

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 283
  • Liked: 340
  • Likes Given: 442
It's unclear whether the emails will trigger anything politically, but ironically they cement something that has been general knowledge for years: Just how far removed from reality legacy aerospace management has fallen, and lost all touch with the pace and direction of innovation in their industry. 

They appear totally oblivious that they've lost track of trends in the market; indifferent that their companies aren't regarded as challenging or exciting among the talent poll; and are increasingly seen as irresponsible, duplicitous,  and unreliable by the institutions they traditionally depend on.

They take their revenues as a given, as if it were somehow written into the Constitution that we have to hire them.  This despite repeated scandals, poor performance in every direction, fiascos from both parent companies on expensive and conspicuous programs time after time (SLS, 737 Max, Starliner, F-35, etc.)

To be in the midst of that maelstrom of failure and disgrace, and complain that it's unfair that SpaceX was gaining ground...

Tell the Titanic orchestra to play you a lament, fellas.
Walk the road without end, and all tomorrows unfold like music.

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
I largely agree with this assessment but if I were Tory, the slandering of NASA leadership, a major client for ULA, would require at least an apology and probably a sacrificial head - Robbie Sabathier would have to go.

Agree that Robbie is toast, especially given her position as ULA Vice President, Government Operations and Communications. Her comm's are too explicit and without the "my sources report" excuses. Expect as you suggest, likely some uncomfortable conversations between ULA and NASA leadership. Also expect all that will occur out of the public eye, and that in a few months, few if any will remember.

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
It's unclear whether the emails will trigger anything politically, but ironically they cement something that has been general knowledge for years: Just how far removed from reality legacy aerospace management has fallen, and lost all touch with the pace and direction of innovation in their industry. 
...

Would classify that as a sense of entitlement... "We've always done it this way before..." or maybe "Who moved my cheese?" Of course that is at odds with disruptive entrants such as SpaceX. Not that it has anything specifically to do with this thread. We have simply been provided a more explicit glimpse of the dark side of the extent some will go to ensure their entitlement--or ensure someone does not move their cheese.

Offline octavo

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 738
I largely agree with this assessment but if I were Tory, the slandering of NASA leadership, a major client for ULA, would require at least an apology and probably a sacrificial head - Robbie Sabathier would have to go.

Agree that Robbie is toast, especially given her position as ULA Vice President, Government Operations and Communications. Her comm's are too explicit and without the "my sources report" excuses. Expect as you suggest, likely some uncomfortable conversations between ULA and NASA leadership. Also expect all that will occur out of the public eye, and that in a few months, few if any will remember.

For someone with a Juris Doctorate degree, it seems particularly foolish.

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
For someone with a Juris Doctorate degree, it seems particularly foolish.
A JD is no insurance against stupidity. We have seen plenty of such stupidity recently in other venues. She should have known better, JD or not. But yes "particularly foolish" is a good summary.

Offline Oersted

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2897
  • Liked: 4098
  • Likes Given: 2773

Online dglow

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
  • Liked: 2295
  • Likes Given: 4433
Article in Washinton Examiner:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/anti-spacex-lobbying-campaign-elon-musk-biden-beef

Clickbait nonsense. “Musk-Biden beef”? Sensational fluff, and approx. 5% of the article’s content.
« Last Edit: 09/23/2021 09:32 pm by dglow »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0