Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Government United States

Edward Snowden: the World Says No To Surveillance 176

Posted by Soulskill from the except-for-the-parts-that-say-yes dept.
An anonymous reader writes: Two years after his whistle-blowing, Edward Snowden finds that his action had profound effects on political decision making and on citizen's understanding of privacy issues. He writes in the NY Times, "In a single month, the N.S.A.’s invasive call-tracking program was declared unlawful by the courts and disowned by Congress. After a White House-appointed oversight board investigation found that this program had not stopped a single terrorist attack, even the president who once defended its propriety and criticized its disclosure has now ordered it terminated. This is the power of an informed public. ... We are witnessing the emergence of a post-terror generation, one that rejects a worldview defined by a singular tragedy. For the first time since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, we see the outline of a politics that turns away from reaction and fear in favor of resilience and reason."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Edward Snowden: the World Says No To Surveillance More

Edward Snowden: the World Says No To Surveillance

Comments Filter:

  • Next! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05, 2015 @10:52AM (#49848733)

    I guess the "terrorists attacks" phase is over. Let's start the "aliens attacks" phase.

    Signed,
    The Illuminati.

    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      by genner ( 694963 )

      I guess the "terrorists attacks" phase is over. Let's start the "aliens attacks" phase.

      Signed, The Illuminati.

      No no you got it wrong. You see the aliens took our jobs. They don't have to attack us.

  • People are claiming a victory where there is none (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05, 2015 @10:56AM (#49848761)

    I feel like they're sensationalizing what is essentially a game of musical chairs -- the data is still being collected (by law). The spying is still happening.

    • Re:People are claiming a victory where there is no (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pla ( 258480 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @10:59AM (#49848787) Journal
      This. Ended the program? Bullshit.. We outsourced the program, the same way the government routinely does with anything it wants but can't legally do itself.

      That said, I'll still take this over what we had last week. But don't think we won the war yet - Not by a looong shot.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        We outsourced the program,

        Right. To the Chinese.

        • No, we outsourced Otto our besties - GCHQ, Canada, Australia, NZ -- the Five Eyes -- as well as Israel. We then trade info, and it's all good.

          If Obama can win a peace prize, then snowden should win the peace prize.

      • "We outsourced the program..."

        Our data has been renditioned.

    • Re:People are claiming a victory where there is no (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fustakrakich ( 1673220 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:39AM (#49849171) Journal

      The spying is still happening.

      That's right... Nothing has changed [theguardian.com]. And Mr. Snowden hasn't been watching the elections recently. Right wing nationalism is all the rage and making a big comeback. Mass media says a lot about surveillance, but at election time the people still don't give a shit.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Media says almost nothing about it except what they're told to say. Obama has so many operatives in the US media, it's scary. Just today this story broke...

        http://www.adweek.com/fishbowldc/msnbcs-rachel-racusen-rejoins-white-house/145784

        Yeah, the mainstream media is the Brown Shirt army of this administration. But please, everyone, keep asking about Kim Retardashian's pregnancy.

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by CrimsonAvenger ( 580665 )

        That's right... Nothing has changed [theguardian.com]. And Mr. Snowden hasn't been watching the elections recently. Right wing nationalism is all the rage and making a big comeback. Mass media says a lot about surveillance, but at election time the people still don't give a shit.

        Right wing nationalism? I'm assuming you didn't notice that the Party that voted the continuation of the spying you're upset about was the left-leaning Party?

    • Re:People are claiming a victory where there is no (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Copid ( 137416 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @12:25PM (#49849641)
      The Onion had it right: Frustrated NSA Now Forced To Rely On Mass Surveillance Programs That Haven’t Come To Light Yet.

      Without real oversight, we can write, repeal, or expire whatever laws we want. It won't make a difference.

    • Pretty much. The NSA stops and so the surveillance shifts to some other obscure agency that does exactly the same thing, but without the NSA's charter. The internet is a two edged sword. It makes corruption and incompetence harder to hide, but guarantees almost universal surveillance.

      Ya' know, when we were watching Star Trek or Babylon 5 as kids, we kind of assumed universal surveillance, a global government and that all money was electronic. Not that it's starting to happen, it's scary as crap. I think it'

    • "Oh, you caught us with our covert, illegal spying program to monitor American citizens. Ok. We'll shut it down. Look, I'm pressing the buttons to shut it down. It's shut down now. I swear it is. Ignore the red light on that camera. That red light means it's not recording. We're definitely not going to start another covert, illegal spying program. If we did, I promise that we'd tell you all about it."

    • Yes the spying is still happening and it's the worst of it that the legislature has yet to address. Yeah, phone meta data collection is bad and unconstitutional, but the data collection from internet activity is worse. It's about a whole lot more than phone calls. Privacy laws related to electronic communications and data storage need to be updated to protect citizens rights from mass surveillance, heavy handed dishonest law enforcement tactics and corporate intrusion into our private lives.

      • Yeah, phone meta data collection is bad and unconstitutional

        Citation?

        http://www.paul.senate.gov/new... [senate.gov]
        "We went to the court, the Second Court of Appeals, the highest court in the land just below the Supreme Court, said that what they are doing is illegal, but we don't yet have a ruling on whether it's Constitutional. One of my fears about the bill that we're going to pass, the sort of in-between step that some think it may be better, is that it will moot the case. "

        Privacy laws related to electronic communications and data storage need to be updated

        Update... besides HIPAA there's... what?

        At least you're on the right track because the constitutional

        • We have protections from general warrants. The unconstitutionality isn't cited as it my own opinion based on my belief that it should be covered by a combination of the 4th and 9th amendments.

          "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." - Ninth amendment text.

          What needs updating in my mind is HIPAA, to expand what we consider medical information and better limit the use of that information and also update The Electronic

          • In addition we need to limit the overly broad interpretation of the Smith case and third party doctrine as applied to customer relationships with corporate service providers.

  • I can agree to that... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @10:56AM (#49848763) Journal

    Mr. Snowden, love him or hate him, actually did a service to the world by pointing out something that, if left ignored, would have rivaled the old East German Stasi in scope and reach (well, if it hasn't already. Hint: It probably has.)

    I would say that if anyone deserved the title of 'whistleblower', this man damned sure qualifies.

    Now, the next step - what in the hell do we actually do about it aside from individual protection? Sure, recent congressional actions (Thank you, Sen. Paul!) have put an end to at least one program... problem is, another grew to take its place (basically, the FBI is picking up where the NSA is allegedly leaving off).

    I suspect this is going to take a lot more work than deleting web cookies and an occasional filibuster...

    • Re:I can agree to that... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by PhrostyMcByte ( 589271 ) <phrosty@gmail.com> on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:00AM (#49848793) Homepage

      Now, the next step - what in the hell do we actually do about it aside from individual protection? Sure, recent congressional actions (Thank you, Sen. Paul!) have put an end to at least one program... problem is, another grew to take its place (basically, the FBI is picking up where the NSA is allegedly leaving off).

      I don't think we will ever trust them on this subject again. Individual protection is the only way, and that is exactly why we have so many government officials saying encryption needs to go.

      • Re:I can agree to that... (Score:5, Informative)

        by jc42 ( 318812 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:41AM (#49849193) Homepage Journal

        Now, the next step - what in the hell do we actually do about it aside from individual protection? Sure, recent congressional actions (Thank you, Sen. Paul!) have put an end to at least one program... problem is, another grew to take its place (basically, the FBI is picking up where the NSA is allegedly leaving off).

        I don't think we will ever trust them on this subject again. Individual protection is the only way, and that is exactly why we have so many government officials saying encryption needs to go.

        There's really just one major reason they haven't succeeded yet: The world's financial system, including your bank and/or credit union, now uses the internet for most of their communications. If encryption is outlawed, all your account information will be going over the wires unencrypted, for anyone along the route to intercept and store for later usage.

        This is probably the main reason that encryption is still legal nearly everywhere (and used without prosecution in many places where it isn't legal). True, it doesn't matter to our rulers whether our account info is flying around unencrypted. But they understand quite well that encryption is what keeps their own large bank accounts safe from raiding by all the world's con men and identity thieves, not to mention their political opponents. Outlawing encryption for The Masses' account info while keeping it legal for anyone with economic or political power is pretty much an unsolved (and probably unsolvable) problem, so in most countries encryption remains legal.

        Of course, they can put pressure on the suppliers of the software, and persuade them to supply encryption that's decodable by their own spy organizations. But this is subject to all the usual gotchas, since decryption keys and code are easily accessible via the usual bribes to the right low-paid admin flunkies in the appropriate organizations. This is something that all our politicians inherently understand, and to protect their own information, they easily decide that their own communications (and their funders') have to remain encrypted.

        We can be fairly sure that our banks and other financial institutions will continue to educate our government leaders about all this, as they have done in the past.

        (Actually, I keep reading that in much of the world, cell phones are now a major tool for handling financial transactions. I'd guess that this requires effective encryption to prevent interception by the crooks, including those inside the phone companies and government agencies. I haven't read good technical articles about how this actually works, especially dealing with local encryption laws. I wonder where the best docs on the topic might be. Perhaps someone here on /. might know .... ;-)

    • Re:I can agree to that... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:02AM (#49848811)

      Maybe the next step (for Americans, at least) should be standing up and demanding that our Government Grant Snowden Clemency [aclu.org].

      Or, at a bare minimum, a guarantee of a fair and PUBLIC trial.

      But, most of can't even be arsed into doing that. Given how we treat those who stand up for us, I am surprised anyone bothers.

      • A trail would have only one possible verdict, and that is guilty. Snowden violated his oath and even though it was an act of civil disobedience, it was still a criminal act. Now if you want to push for him to get a pardon that would be different.

        Personally I say he is both a hero and a traitor at the same time.

        • Re:I can agree to that... (Score:5, Informative)

          by Totenglocke ( 1291680 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:32AM (#49849089)
          He didn't violate his oath, he violated an NDA. I'm pretty sure that courts have consistently ruled in favor of immunity for breaking an NDA when exposing criminal behavior.

          • He didn't violate ann da, he violated laws about leaking classified information. Big diff.

            • How is it different? Other than the fact that the people whose criminal actions he exposed have the ability to kill anyone they want without consequences.

              • How is it different? Other than the fact that the people whose criminal actions he exposed have the ability to kill anyone they want without consequences.

                Severity of the crime, for one. Severity of the punishment, too. One is a civil offense and the other is a criminal offense. Pound-you-in-the-ass prison.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by chihowa ( 366380 )

          What oath did he break? The only oath he took was the one that all federal employees take:

          I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.

        • ...demanding that our Government Grant Snowden Clemency

          ... Now if you want to push for him to get a pardon that would be different.

          Actually it would be exactly the same. In fact, if you type 'Clemency' into Wikipedia, it redirects to the page for Pardon [wikipedia.org].

        • Re:I can agree to that... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by blue9steel ( 2758287 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @12:45PM (#49849837)
          Agreed, he's guilty as sin, but he did the right thing morally and for the country at great personal cost, we should pardon him.
      • First off, Snowden would never get a fair trial. Secondly, if he came back to the US, he'd almost certainly be assassinated before he could ever get to a court room.

        • There's no way he'd be assassinated, if it hasn't already happened in Russia where there's no shortage of highly experienced local assassination contractors to pay.

          • Do you think that the US government would contract out his assassination? There would be HUGE motivation for the person being paid to kill him to in fact tell Snowden and then have THAT news out there as well.
          • If he was assassinated in Russia, the Russians would probably have a word or two. Not to mention that it would open Pandora's box, because then they would have the moral justification to start killing any dissidents in the US (and the Chinese would do the same), basically declaring a free for all on political enemies world wide.

            • Yes. While he's in Russia, the CIA is most vested in keeping him safe.

              I can't think of a safer place for him on the whole planet.

        • First off, Snowden would never get a fair trial. Secondly, if he came back to the US, he'd almost certainly be assassinated before he could ever get to a court room.

          Doubtful that he'd be assassinated. More likely as in previous examples, he'd be arrested and secluded and not see a court room till he was willing to say what the government wants him to say.

      • Where should this fair, public trial be held?

    • Re:I can agree to that... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:16AM (#49848939)

      "would have rivaled the old East German Stasi"

      Are you kidding me? When was the last time you feared for your life because you said the president is doing a crappy job? How many of your relatives or friends have disappeared into the night?

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        "would have rivaled the old East German Stasi"

        Are you kidding me? When was the last time you feared for your life because you said the president is doing a crappy job? How many of your relatives or friends have disappeared into the night?

        Due to NSL we cannot comment on those issues. Maybe they just went on an extended vacation without telling anybody. [ /sarcasm ]

        • Sir, we kindly request that you cease the communication now and turn your attention to something different. Thank you for your cooperation.

      • When was the last time you feared for your life because you said the president is doing a crappy job? How many of your relatives or friends have disappeared into the night?

        There are about 10 SWAT assault per day in the US, most of them "accidentally" getting the "wrong address" and shooting up innocent people. Seeing how we know that the government has been reading all online communication and listening to phone calls, many of those murders very well could be due to people speaking out against the government.

      • Re:I can agree to that... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Terwin ( 412356 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:49AM (#49849293)

        "would have rivaled the old East German Stasi"

        Are you kidding me? When was the last time you feared for your life because you said the president is doing a crappy job? How many of your relatives or friends have disappeared into the night?

        Hear about what happened to political activists in Wisconsin when they went against the unions or supported those who did?

        http://www.nationalreview.com/... [nationalreview.com]

        If something similar is going on today, it would be illegal for anyone to talk about it.
        So unless you have personally tried to take political action against the President or other entrenched powers, what makes you think you would *not* be given cause to fear for your life and those of your loved ones should you do so?

      • Re:I can agree to that... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @12:09PM (#49849489)

        You're taking your knowledge about the former East Bloc from 80s US series, I take it?

        The Stasi was far more subtle than this Stalinist browbeat methods. They also didn't have to, there were far more efficient and sinister means at their disposal. If you were on "the list", you were just being bullied. It was subtle, but usually direct enough that you knew that you should "correct" your behaviour. E.g. you didn't get promoted anymore and if you ask, you were informed that your "performance" doesn't warrant it. Things you received from Western relatives got "lost" in transport miraculously. They went so far to inconvenience your friends so they would turn away from you to "get back on the good side", provided that simple slander didn't already do the job. It went as far as turning your friends and more so even your coworkers against you. How do you think it is, if your friends don't know you anymore and your coworkers know that making every moment you spend at work a living hell will earn them brownie points with the higher ups?

        And so on, so forth. A totalitarian state has many powerful ways to make your life absolutely miserable without even talking to you directly, let alone "making you disappear".

        The huge advantage of this whole scheme is that you can't even complain about it. The state? Noooo, the state has nothing against you. You're just a lazy worker, that's all. And quite unlucky too. And somehow you really don't know how to deal with people if everyone at work hates you.

    • Sure, recent congressional actions (Thank you, Sen. Paul!) have put an end to at least one program...

      No [theguardian.com].. It was high drama, nothing more.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Sloppy ( 14984 )

      what in the hell do we actually do about it aside from individual protection?

      Protection is it. That's the thing to do about it.

      put an end to at least one program... problem is, another grew to take its place

      And that is a problem that is all but guaranteed. Even if we put loads of political pressure on our own government to stop being one of the bad guys, our government isn't the only government. And even if you were to magically control all governments: governments aren't the only game in town.

      You have to

    • would have rivaled the old East German Stasi in scope and reach

      First, I think Germans under the Stasi would have traded us all their national security/law enforcement & intelligence folks for all ours today in a heartbeat, and if you think otherwise you are stark raving mad. Intelligence isn't evil, getting arrested for dissent is, regardless how you're found out.

      Sure, recent congressional actions (Thank you, Sen. Paul!) have put an end to at least one program...

      What the hell are you talking about, his goal was to amend the Freedom Act. The Senate passed the unmodified House version days later. This is right out of Senator Paul's mouth days ago. http://www.pau [senate.gov]

  • This is my problem with Snowden (Score:5, Insightful)

    by barlevg ( 2111272 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:00AM (#49848797)
    He really seems to live in his own bubble of self-delusion. The majority of Americans: (1) do not know about NSA surveillance, (2) do not care and (3) have no fucking idea who Edward Snowden is. [youtube.com] Just this week, the USA Freedom Act reauthorized these programs, and the only politician who seems to care? Rand Paul, the most hated man in the Senate. [washingtonpost.com] I'm sorry, but the consequences of Snowden's leaks have been minimal, and, if the world is saying anything about surveillance, it's not no, it's "Yeah, okay. Whatever."

    • Re:This is my problem with Snowden (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:16AM (#49848941)

      1. World != US
      2. Before his relevations all infosec guys who knew and were talking about this stuff were considered conspiracypathic lunatics. Now the people who deny existance of this stuff are considered idiots or liars.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      This. As long as Americans can go home and watch Fox News and eat their big macs and drink their coke, they just don't give a shit about anything. The ruling elite likes to keep it that way.

      • This. As long as Americans can go home and watch Fox News

        FYI most Americans don't watch Fox News......in fact only a small minority watch cable news at all.

    • Re:This is my problem with Snowden (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Nite_Hawk ( 1304 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:55AM (#49849357) Homepage

      This isn't about self-delusion, this is about politics. It's good for snowden (and us) to claim progress and warm people up to the idea that even Washington thinks totally unchecked surveillance maybe goes a little too far. I suspect it's also ultimately good for the political class too if they play their cards right. Snowden is a chaotic figure that divides party votes in strange and unexpected ways. I imagine mainstream politicians hate that. He needs to be either a traitor or a patriot, not something in-between that divides their votes. The freedom act is a nice bump for Snowden into the patriot camp. It gives politicians cover for supporting him (or at least claiming he was well meaning if misguided). Once that starts, I think it will snowball and Snowden eventually will come back home (while his message will be coopted and perverted to benefit re-election campaigns).

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ljw1004 ( 764174 )

      That's your problem with Snowden?? It sounds like your problem is instead with the majority of Americans.

    • To the American public and our daily lives, the impact has been slight, but its done somethings like inspire TLS 1.2 implementation, and other organizations to seriously re-check and resecure their systems.

      the people who work in technology noticed and many companies are seriously not trusting the government anymore

      The NSA has lost some operational capability and fired a whole bunch of sysadmins because it no longer trusts its people, this limiting its operational capabilities. Morale is low.

      Less people are

  • American Hero (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NichardRixon ( 869899 ) on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:37AM (#49849153)

    Edward Snowden knowingly gave the world this information at enormous personal cost. Only if enough of us stand up, stop debating minutiae, and demand that it stop will Mr. Snowden's sacrifice have been worth it.

    • The initial Verizon warrants were on an air-gapped server. Even with root everywhere on the network, these documents should have been inaccessible.

      This situation makes more sense if we posit that the NSA had already been deeply penetrated by Russian intelligence, who learned of Snowden's sentiments and elected to assist him [washingtonpost.com] for reasons and costs of their own.

      Snowden initially claimed that he was trying to reach Cuba. There are somewhat more direct routes than Hong Kong.

      We likely do not know 1/100th of the b

  • Sure, any normal, sane individual doesn't want 24x7 monitoring of all their activities.

    However, their governments do.

    In the US, we are powerless to stop it. Our rulers will pass whatever law they like, no mater how odious.

Slashdot Top Deals

Children begin by loving their parents. After a time they judge them. Rarely, if ever, do they forgive them. - Oscar Wilde

Close