Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begins

[Chris Rice]

No explanation as to why Truong was there but a clear implication from Sand that Truong was another who could have had access to Leong's email account and potentially could have leaked the email in question.

[John McKenna]

No. Not just passing - on way to N.Pole from where a saucer would return him to Mars.

[Paolo Casaschi]

Has anyone with some technical competence reviewed the actual email sent from the likely fake person to the various journalists and sites?

Even if a webmail service has been used with a new account created on purpose, you'd be amazed how much info might be retrieved from the email headers, especially if you assume we are not dealing with the most savvy hackers.

[John McKenna]

The hackers don't need to be very savvy if it's an inside, put-up job.

[Paolo Casaschi]

The hackers don't need to be very savvy if it's an inside, put-up job.

Exactly. But if they are not very savvy they might leave traces behind that might tell where the leak comes from. Hence my question: has anyone with some technical competence reviewed the actual email sent from the likely fake person to the various journalists and sites?

[Chris Rice]

Perhaps some kind and thorough person would be so good as to check Andrew Paulson's previous claims, on this forum, to be completely independent from Kirsan Ilyumzhinov.
I would do so myself, but I am just about to start in Gibraltar...

Good luck in Gibraltar. Under the thread Andrew Paulsen - Candidacy for ECF President contains what you're looking for:

http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=5871

To save you a bit of time I've identified the following posts as probably the most relevant.

Thursday September 19 - 7.59pm, 9.22pm, 9.28pm, 10.23pm
Friday 20 September - 6.27am, 6.50am
Friday 11 October 10.59am & 8.41pm

[Angus French]

Possibly of relevance to the ST story: a copy of FIDE's contract with Agon can be found here (or, more directly: http://www.fide.com/images/stories/NEWS ... d_Agon.pdf).

- There is a clause (in section 5) requiring Agon to make an up front payment of $500,000 (whether or not that payment has been made: who knows);
- FIDE gets money for each event (see 3.2.(b).(ii)) - equal to 20% or 25% of the prize money fund;
- FIDE gets money each year from 2016 (see 4) - between 30% and 55% of "Adjusted Gross Sponsorship Revenue" or 500,000 Euros, whichever is greater.

[Angus French]

Perhaps some kind and thorough person would be so good as to check Andrew Paulson's previous claims, on this forum, to be completely independent from Kirsan Ilyumzhinov.
I would do so myself, but I am just about to start in Gibraltar...

Good luck in Gibraltar. Under the thread Andrew Paulsen - Candidacy for ECF President contains what you're looking for:

http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=5871

To save you a bit of time I've identified the following posts as probably the most relevant.

Thursday September 19 - 7.59pm, 9.22pm, 9.28pm, 10.23pm
Friday 20 September - 6.27am, 6.50am
Friday 11 October 10.59am & 8.41pm

Chris, are any of those posts relevant?

As the ST article makes clear, the deal that was originally envisaged (with Ilyumzhinov taking a 51% stake in a company awarded a contract to promote top tournaments) did NOT come into being. The deal between FIDE and Agon was struck in early 2012, well before Andrew Paulson stood for election to the post of ECF President. Unless you know different - and please say if you do - I don't see any reason to question Andrew Paulson's assertions that he is the sole owner of Agon and independent of Ilyumzhinov.

[Chris Rice]

Hi Angus - I'm not questioning Andrew Paulson at all on the AGON stuff or anything else for that matter. I don't see any evidence at all at the moment against Andrew Paulson. What Nigel Short asked for was Andrew Paulson's previous claims on the EC Forum that he was independent from Ilyumzhinov. What Andrew Paulson has said in the highlighted posts, where at times he got a right battering, surely has some relevance to that don't you think? Even if its only to prove he is above board. In fact the questions and answers on bribery and corruption in FIDE were almost spooky given what has happened!

[JustinHorton]

No explanation as to why Truong was there

As you might have surmised, I'm quite intrigued as to why this individual of no very great reputation should be apparently at or around the centre of events.

[Jonathan Rogers]

Hi Angus - I'm not questioning Andrew Paulson at all on the AGON stuff or anything else for that matter. I don't see any evidence at all at the moment against Andrew Paulson. What Nigel Short asked for was Andrew Paulson's previous claims on the EC Forum that he was independent from Ilyumzhinov. What Andrew Paulson has said in the highlighted posts, where at times he got a right battering, surely has some relevance to that don't you think? Even if its only to prove he is above board. In fact the questions and answers on bribery and corruption in FIDE were almost spooky given what has happened!

Gosh, most of those questions were asked by me! You are reading the words of the next Jeremy Paxman

I see that when I asked who could vouch for the success of AGON, AP mentioned the two people to whom (we are now told) AGON apparently sends accounts - though that might be as one would expect.

Perhaps we should have asked AP why AGON is based in Jersey, and whether there is any reason why he might not want its accounts to be more widely distributed?

It is unfortunate that the ECF President should appear in the Sunday Times in this way, but the ECF Council knew full well the sort of thing it was letting itself in for - and didn't care.

[Roger de Coverly]

As you might have surmised, I'm quite intrigued as to why this individual of no very great reputation should be apparently at or around the centre of events.

He's married to Susan Polgar who was a commentator for the live coverage along with Lawrence Trent and later Nigel. A number of photographs are credited to him, so he may have had an official role as "photographer". Some have alleged that he's expert at accessing emails.

The Morten Sand interview does contain some other curious comments. For example it's suggested that the Sunday Times contacted AP about their story on Agon, whereupon he threatened legal action. The ST now suggest that the material presumably obtained by the newspaper implying ownership by Kirsan was draft only. Even so, it puts some flesh on the rumour that Malcolm Pein quoted in the first six months of Agon that it (Agon) was some form of Kirsan front organisation. Whether Kirsan told the FIDE Board at the time of signing the Agon agreement, that he had considered investing in Agon, but ultimately decided against isn't known.

Wasn't Morten Sand one of FIDE's legal advisers as well as a former Vice-President?

[Angus French]

Isn't all this stuff about Agon a smokescreen?

The real issue - for me anyway - is what Kasparov and his team are doing to secure votes - an issue on which Nigel Short, the ECF Delegate to FIDE, has yet to comment.

[John McKenna]

The hackers don't need to be very savvy if it's an inside, put-up job.

Exactly. But if they are not very savvy they might leave traces behind that might tell where the leak comes from. Hence my question: has anyone with some technical competence reviewed the actual email sent from the likely fake person to the various journalists and sites?

Very unlikely to happen - might as well look for a smoking gun and magic bullet.
Give my regards to 'Martian', Paul Truong, if anyone sees him.
(He was one of the strongest players and an admin, iirc, on the USChessLive site.)

[Paolo Casaschi]

The hackers don't need to be very savvy if it's an inside, put-up job.

Exactly. But if they are not very savvy they might leave traces behind that might tell where the leak comes from. Hence my question: has anyone with some technical competence reviewed the actual email sent from the likely fake person to the various journalists and sites?

Very unlikely to happen - might as well look for a smoking gun and magic bullet.

I suspect you don't really know what you are talking about.
Also, it's not intended as a legal proof for a trial, just a very simple exercise that might give you some clues as what happened... you only need to have the full original email with all header info and to know how to read those info.