NSA Tapping Underwater Fiber Optics 186
An anonymous reader submitted an interesting story about the NSA
splicing fiber optics under water in order to eavesdrop on digital traffic. This happened years ago, so who knows what they're doing today. Not surprisingly, apparently actually getting the tap is relatively easy. Sifting through the zillions of bits and finding something useful is a little trickier.
Who knows... (Score:1)
1m thick? Are you a gringo? (Score:1)
A fiber optic cable is, at most, 40 mm thick, which means, in those brain-dead units "people" in the USA use, 1.5 inches.
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:1)
Don't touch the fiber! (Score:3)
Shock! Shock! Horror! Horror! (Score:3)
--
"Don't trolls get tired?"
Re:Old News --- REALLY Old (Score:4)
I think the Navy also did it in the Barrets Sea to the north of Murmansk as well.
It's really interesting how the Navy thought to tap into cable. A Navy Officer remebered boating with his dad on the Mississippi and seeing signs that marked cable runs under water, so he talked head of Naval Operations into sending subs in to see if the Russians had the same sort of signs. They did and the rest is history.
Re:Impossible (Score:2)
Carefully remove the shield on the optical fibre and put a light detecting device to read the traffic.
The very thing that makes fiber work (Total Internal Reflection (Refraction? I can never keep it straight)) prevents you from doing this. In order to see the light you must make some of it escape by bending the fiber such that some of the light escapes but not all of it, or else the remote end will detect the loss of signal.
Even with the fiber bent the remote end will see some loss of signal but should compensate without problem. Now if I were the NSA I'd make sure I could get away with very little bending so that hardly any loss would be detected, and simply rely on my advanced hardware to boost a very weak signal.
Re:This is not such a big deal (Score:1)
Yes there are isolators in the system but at each EDFA repeater there is a small internal tap that takes a signal from the eastward fibre and sends it back to base along the westward fibre.
This lets the cable operators diagnose cable fault positions very accurately.
Re:OTDR Will find splice taps (Score:1)
And no, they don't use std OTDR, but the idea is the same. At each repeater (remember they are all optical nowadays) there is a tap from the 'eastward' fibre that sends a signal back along the 'westward' fibre of the pair. (And vice-versa) This lets the cable operators know exactly where any break/bend or power drop occurred, in real time.
In fact the terrestrial companies (like Terraworx) are starting to use this technology on land because they go coast-to-coast all optically and some of those repeater huts are hard to reach in winter. Hence a remote diagnosis tool is necessary.
Just plain wrong (Score:1)
Old tech. They used to do hybrid stuff like this, several optical amp stages and then a regen stage but not any more. There is no electrical stage in a modern undersea cable. They use non-zero dispersion compensating fibre in certain stretches of the system. Typically 4 repeater hops of std fibre then one of the nzd fibre which has the _opposite_ effect and corrects it all. End effect is that at landfall the signals have minimal dispersion.
More 'just plain wrong' (Score:1)
One of the latest [tycomltd.com] transatlantic cables that went down had 64 channels at 10Gig per channel. Future cables will (roughly) double the number of channels to 100ish and double the data rate per channel. After that the plans are to polarization combine two signals at the same wavelength, one signal horizontally polarized the other vertically polarized.
In this whole area the commercially deployed systems are catching up with lab tech at an alarming rate. The 'field' is now only about 2 years behind the 'lab'.
Old News --- REALLY Old (Score:1)
So what is the big surprise?
This is not such a big deal (Score:1)
For amplitude modulated signal in general (the least secure of them all) the only way you can notice if you are being taped is if the amplitude of the signal suddenly drops.
This is how, by the way German army dumped a lot of desinformation on Red army through their phone cables in the fields at the beginning of the Warld War II. You see, Sovied Union did not have good quality quartz crystals that time so the Red army tryed to tap german phone lines with the most primitive headphones (you know, based on coil and metal membrane) which consumed noticable amount of power. So as soon as Germans would notice that power in the line droped they'd start some lame conversation with pretty bad consequences for Soviet troops.(mind you, the situation changed by the middle of the WWII).
Now to tap long haul optical line is not big deal because the optical signal is regenerated anyway. You have to do it for many reasons. Amplitude dops due to propagation. About 30 dB per 100 km. You also need to do the correction of the signal that being distorted by dispersion.
If you regenerate signal with repeater then there you go. Because this thing first converts optical signal to electrical then amplifies it and converts back to optical. So in this case you can just tap electrical part.
If signal is being regenerated with EDFA (erbium doped fiber amplyfier) you still can tap it.
It is actually pretty cool idea and was proposed by the guy (as far as i remember) from BT about ten years ago. He and coworkers published about three papers on that subject in various journals including IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics.
What you can do is insert semiconductor optical amplifier in the optical link. It's primary purpose would be to amplify the optical signal. If you really want to hide your presence you need to put it in zero loss regime when amount of the gain in it is equal to the amount of the loss it brings to the system. If you keep this semiconductor optical amplyfier at constant current then voltage drop acros it will be variable if any optical signal comes throug it. So basically you will get electrical signal as a byproduct.
The rest is easy. Everybody knows what SONET frame looks like
It is interesting that when it is was proposed this idea was discarded because semiconductor optical amplifiers were not that fast at all. Nowdays they can be used for 10 Gb/s optical links but not for 40 Gb/s which is not big deal yet because 40 Gb/s is not that widely implemented.
Re:Fiber Splicing (Score:1)
I don't know how modern cables look like but ther first cables that were put in 80's had cooper core and cooper shell with bunch of fibers in between (don't remember how many). Cooper shell and core were used to deliver power to the repeaters which during those times where basically photodiode+LED pair. Which was OK that time because fibers were multimode anyway.
Re:This is not such a big deal (Score:1)
One fellow many posts above said that OTDR (optical time domain reflectometry) will detect the tap. What OTDR does is spits optical pulses into the optical link and then detects any pulses that come back. And of course using time of the arrival of the relfected pulse you can calculate where reflection happened. I think this can be remidied by puting optical isolator in front of the tap (whatever this tap is). Optical isolators are very common. Every transmitting laser for long distance has it because these lasers are sensitive to the back reflection.
Now the questioin is what are you going to do with the signal theat you read from the optical link.
The signal in optical cables is not just some kind of stream of bits. The protocol for physical layer is SONET. The minimal unit of this protocol is SONET frame. if you draw on a piece of paper the rectangle 9 squares high and 90 squres long this will be common representation for SONET frame. Each square is one byte. First four coulomns of this matrix (if i remember correctly) will be header which tells what kind of information this packet carries plus some other datails. Then there will be two or three coulomns gap (empty) the rest of the coulomns will be so called payload (actual infromation). So technically speaking you can distinguish SONET frames from each other. For this specific task you don't need supercomputer. Conventional highspeed digital electronics will do fine. But how are you going analyze payload that's different question. And I don't know the answer. I gues to have one or two Crays for a start would be nice.
Pr0n, mp3, and DivX making NSA's life tough (Score:2)
Now, I suppose, we *really* know why governments around the world want to eradicate music-swapping and "indecent" Internet imagery - they can't monitor what we're really up to through all the noise :)
Of course, you can take anything said in public about intelligence activities with several grains of salt. If the NSA *can* successfully and selectively monitor undersea cable traffic, they're not going to be so silly as to broadcast that fact to the world.
Go you big red fire engine!
Re:Data Overload (Score:1)
I think over the last decade, and prehaps for another decade or so, the rate of data increase is greater then the rate that spy gear abilities increase. But eventualy, bandwidth requirements will increase in parallel with population. And when that happens, Moors law will quickly allow spy tech to catch up.
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:2)
Traffic Analysis (Score:4)
Echelon (Score:1)
Funny they didn't mention it in the article. (but then again they rarely do.)
Read more at cryptome.org [quintessenz.at].
They can sift data better than you think (Score:1)
It more or less comes down to semi-dedicated hardware that can grep at insane speeds. Most of the parts necessary are comercially available (even some GPLed software components), needing just a little bit of glue to tie everything together. The professor heading the project was looking for somebody to help him do the implementation. He described how it works, and claimed that it should be trivially easy. And except for some problems with self-similarity in the data stream (finding "bb gun" in "bbb gun"), it has been. Even so, this problem can be trivially solved by throwing more hardware at it, or by putting just a little bit of effort into the software.
If an undergraduate research assistant can do a damn good job of it with 3 weeks coding and under $10K in hardware, just think about what the NSA could do. I'd rather put my trust into good crypto, rather than the firehose effect.
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:2)
maken
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:2)
Fiber optics with current technology transmit all the data on a single optical wavelength. The technology to do multiple wavelengths has been in development for a while, but we haven't hit serious barriers with a single wavelength, so this technology hasn't been commercialized.
And the rate at which a light is pulsed doesn't affect its propogation rate. That would violate all sorts of laws of physics.
The real reason why you must do the electrical conversion and back is that several sources combine to cause slight variations in the time bits of light take to get from one end of the fiber to the next. Chaos and imperfections in the glass effectively blur the time dimension of the signal at the output end, so you must clean the signal periodically.
This has nothing to do with the fact that different wavelengths of light travel at different speeds through matter. That causes chromatic aberation in lenses, which is one of the reasons why big telescopes use only mirrors. But since there is on a single color of light going through the fiber, there cannot be any chromatic aberration.
-Matt
Real Tapping Happens at NAPs These Days... (Score:3)
In closing, governments, etc are typically years ahead of the media and common-knowledge in regards to intellegence gathering. NAP tapping is never mentioned in the media, but I'm sure it's happening. Be forewarned
Re:Oh... Democracy at its best, right? (Score:2)
I never condoned anything, I simply stated the two jobs of the NSA.
That said, deriding someone for thinking it okay to invade privacy for their own benefit while criticising socialism is kind of ironic. In a market economy (hint: the opposite of socialism) the only reason to do ANYTHING is for your own benefit. That's the whole point -- if I can tap into a transoceanic cable and make it profitable, the free market says I should be able to.
You apparently think I should not be able to (presumably by the use of police force or such to stop me?). Communist...
---------------------------------------------
Re:Isn't it ironic... (Score:3)
The NSA has two jobs -- one is to breach foreign information security, but their other is to keep US information secure. So it isn't ironic -- they just have to know security from both sides.
---------------------------------------------
Different operation, not fiber, big difference! (Score:2)
Not even the NSA can tap fiberoptics inductively - laws of physics and all that. They would have to splice it, a much more difficult thing to do at the bottom of the ocean.
If a fiberoptic tap has really occurred - and as far as I can tell, the evidence is simply from unnamed sources according to ZDNet - it would be a very different animal from the Okhotsk tap. Okhotsk used high-capacity recorders to store the info for later retrieval by submarine. That would have been analog data. You couldn't save enough digital fiberoptic data in a recording pod to make it worthwhile. You'd have to drop a Cray on the seafloor to process some of the data in realtime and save only what you're interested in.
That's an operation for a l33t hax0r somewhere - hack into the NSA Cray that's sitting on the ocean bed somewhere off the Kamchatka pensinsula...
"innocent" fishing boat solves the problem (Score:2)
All the NSA would have to do would be arrange for a fishing boat to snag the cable they were planning to splice, to explain the interruption.
but how does NSA get the data? (Score:4)
considering that laying an optical cable is somewhere O(1e9) $ and not trivial to lay undetected, it must be quite a feat...
Impossible (Score:2)
So there.
Re:Impossible (Score:2)
Oh well.
Re:Getting the data back to the NSA... (Score:1)
> fiberoptic cable to send it back to themselves on.
Of course not!
They have specially trained teams of hyperintelligent octupi down there analysing the data in real time, then the brain waves of the octupi are picked up using a reverse feedback effect of the orbital mind control lasers, which then beam it back down to your brain, where it leaks out into your mobile phone (even when it's switched off and not in the room) and they recover the signal from there.
Summary (Score:1)
OTDR Will find splice taps (Score:2)
Too easy? (Score:1)
That must give the NSA or whoever a couple days to splice the cable at another point. Service goes back online, all looks normal.
Am I missing something obvious? You don't even need to be discreet. Just provide a decoy.
Ten years ago, $20,000 and a van (Score:2)
-russ
Re:All these grand theories !?! (Score:2)
Actually, you have no choice once you start inflating your currency. It's recession now or depression later. Look at Turkey. The Turkish Lire is now 1,110,500 to the dollar. It was only 580,000 to the dollar when I was there a year ago. Eventually they'll be hauling lire around in wheelbarrows because they're so worthless.
-russ
Similar to antother interview (Score:4)
"Oh, Kent, I'd be lying if I said my men weren't committing crimes"- Homer J. Simpson
This is impossible. Or not. (Score:3)
It isn't known whether the cable's operator detected the intrusion, though former NSA officials say they believe it went unnoticed.
When I was a freshman in college and had to take a class on telecommunications we had an engineer from Southwestern Bell come out and explain these new fangled fiber optics. One of the claims he made was that they would be nigh-impossible to tap because the splice could be detected at either end rather easily due to latency issues.
So my question is this: Anyone have any ideas how the heck they might have done this? Whatever the device was, it seems it'd have to be very, very fast at whatever it does. The only thing I can imagine is some sort of intelligent lens that reads signals while they pass through it.
Scary, whatever it is.
- Rev.Re:Getting the data back to the NSA... (Score:1)
Errr... wouldn't it just make sense for them to both tap the original cable, because tapping the tap wouldn't give them any more information!
Data Overload (Score:2)
So they're going to build a room to drop to the bottom of the ocean, splice a cable, and then hold a computer cluster to process the data? Unless they are interested in very targetted ip's or other easily sorted packets, it'll be huge and costly. Anything interesting will probably be encrypted anyway, so they have to add a couple orders of magnitude of computer power for that.
Or maybe they are going to run their own fiber bundle back to dry land? Govornment agencies don't have quite that kind of budget.
Even if they can get reasonable results right now, Bandwidth usage is growing faster than processing power. They won't be able to keep up for much longer. And then eventually they will be caught, causing all the cable companies to search their entire lines for more taps, pissing off innumerable foreign countries.
The spy business ain't what it used to be.
Re:Data Overload (Score:2)
However, as traffic grows and grows, they'll only be able to heuristically/pseudorandomly monitor a smaller and smaller portion of the traffic. Theoretically it would grow so small as to become an insignificant ammount.
Imagine this sort of scheme. All they really need to do is store all the possibly informative traffic and then randomly scan that. This is probably mostly text, which is tiny and relatively easily scanned. Things like live porn and back episodes of southpark can be safely ignored. To do this, they have to search though this fat pipe and check every packet to see whether it contains part of an e-mail. Even better, they should check it's source/destination IPs. With bandwidth growing like it is, they won't even be able to do that. So even if they know Mr. Russia and Mr. China are planning something nasty, they can't even reliably catch all the data transmitted between them. Unless it's important enough to plant bugs right at their house.
I suppose America just has to hope for few enough terrorists that we can bug them all properly. I of course hope for that already, but Mr. Bush hasn't spent a lot of time making friends lately, and the fear seems to be more towards lots of smaller, disorganized, hard to bug terrorist groups than anything else.
I'll call your bluff... (Score:1)
I suppose what your suggesting could be true, without some sort of proof, it sounds awfully far-fetched (that, or your stretching the truth or leaving out a lot of important "details").
To whomever modded this up "Informative", I have one thing to say: "Gullible isn't in the dictionary. Go ahead, try to look it up, it's not there".
Re:but how does NSA get the data? (Score:2)
1. converts to the electrical domain
2. follows a TDMed stream of SONET frames for a few seconds from a single phone call.
3. If a certain word is found (through voice recognition) real-time action could be taken or the information could be recorded to tape.
The point is; sorting for whatever you want basically has to be done on site and in a limited way.
Re:Traffic Analysis (Score:1)
'We begin bombing in five minutes' - R. Reagan
Re:Traffic Analysis (Score:1)
In the past (Easter rising Ireland 1916 being one case) notices in the small ads of newspapers have been used as a widely distributed medium where an extra coded message might not be intercepted by the enemy.
Re:They did this during the cold war... (Score:1)
Re:OTDR Will find splice taps (Score:2)
It should be possible to design a dedicated-purpose OTDR that could be left connected to a DWDM unit's spare channel, and periodically scan the line. IANA Optical Engineer, and I don't know whether receivers are sensitive enough to resolve reflected signals with the necessary resolution. (I'm thinking erbium?)
Assuming that most undersea cable operators have redundant paths and protection switching, they could take a circuit down, OTDR the thing, and bring it back up, but why? There's no profit for them in this. Most SONET receivers, at least the big Nortel ones, will report their received light level in software. That's a good enough indication of impending cable problems, and it doesn't involve poking at an already-fragile circuit.
Re:Getting the data back to the NSA... (Score:1)
That could work. But there would have to be another tap to read it again, and (much harder) remove the added light before it reached the cable's normal destination, where anyone could see it.
If the NSA had access to the headends of the cable (say if one end was in the USA) it would be a much simpler matter of tapping or monitoring the data before it was multiplexed with a lot of other data and converted into light pulses. Or at worst tapping a land-based fiber by simply entering a manhole or digging down a few feet to the cable.
Re:Geeze... (Score:1)
Erbium-Doped Fiber Amplifiers (EDFAs) were invented in 1987. Okay, let's check Google... it serves up this [att.com] among other things...
So they've been in use a while too.
Geeze... (Score:2)
Re:Geeze... (Score:2)
Using what data channel? They would have to winnow the information down to a tiny percentage of what was transmitted at the tap site (or
install their own undersea cable, which would be too hard to hide for the NSA's taste).
Re:Getting the data back to the NSA... (Score:2)
Unfortunately, the entire budget of the program was wasted due to my rentng a house that possesses $39.49 of cheap but aluminum-foil-backed cellulose insulation, which does little to keep heat out or in but blocked the final link in the chain.
As well as anyone else trying to call me on the cellphone while I'm in the house.
Getting the data back to the NSA... (Score:5)
Good thing the Ex-Soviet Union didn't have the tech, apparently, or the NSA would have then found their own monitoring cable tapped, and have to install another tap and cable on the USSR's return cable, which would then be tapped by the Reds, and so on, and so on...
Re:Old News --- REALLY Old (Score:1)
So yes, it was not optical back then, but the mission was basically the same. They had to go back every so often and collect the old tapes / put new ones in, and that was the biggest downside. But that does not seem like it would work, since you would need a huge tape to record all that info. They would have needed some way to relay the data more or less in real time. The article never really says that this happened, and I do not believe it did. How would you relay real time data from a fiber optic cable out in the middle of the ocean? These are not a few phone conversations, these are constant, high bandwidth streams.
Re:Old News --- REALLY Old (Score:1)
This comment clears that up. [slashdot.org]
Re:Actually, Blind Man's Bluff mentions TWO exploi (Score:1)
Blind Man's Bluff. If you liked u-571, das boot, red october, this is the real story.
NSA snippets (Score:3)
The Wall Street Journal [wsj.com] just ran this something similar.. (haven't checked the zdnet doc lagging on dl's) [mirror [antioffline.com]]
Anyways I doubt its impossible for the NSA to splice it, however when companies take the corrective measures to ensure this won't happen what are they going to do...
Example, say a company takes the time, and money to protect their fiber say inside inexpensive pvc pipes or something similar, who does the government expect to blame when a company finds out that 100 miles away from any shoreline, their casing has been breached? Certainly its not Joe Fisherman doing this.
Anyways aside from that nothing is going to help them when that fiber line is carrying IPSec data all the way through the connections, along with messages that have been encrypted before even being sent. So many people have little to worry about.
For those interested in Crypto Equipment and such (especially those working in the ISP segments) you can check out the Crypto Equipment Guide [antioffline.com]. Hopefully many companies will start looking at their clients (whether their employees, subscribers, etc.) more serious. I know Earthlink is taking that approach.
here is that 411 (Score:4)
Submarine cable interception
Submarine cables now play a dominant role in international telecommunications, since - in contrast to the limited bandwidth available for space systems - optical media offer seemingly unlimited capacity. Save where cables terminate in countries where telecommunications operators provide Comint access (such as the UK and the US), submarine cables appear intrinsically secure because of the nature of the ocean environment. 49. In October 1971, this security was shown not to exist. A US submarine, Halibut, visited the Sea of Okhotsk off the eastern USSR and recorded communications passing on a military cable to the Khamchatka Peninsula Halibut was equipped with a deep diving chamber, fully in view on the submarine's stern. The chamber was described by the US Navy as a "deep submergence rescue vehicle". The truth was that the "rescue vehicle" was welded immovably to the submarine. Once submerged, deep-sea divers exited the submarine and wrapped tapping coils around the cable. Having proven the principle, USS Halibut returned in 1972 and laid a high capacity recording pod next to the cable. The technique involved no physical damage and was unlikely to have been readily detectable.
The Okhotsk cable tapping operation continued for ten years, involving routine trips by three different specially equipped submarines to collect old pods and lay new ones; sometimes, more than one pod at a time. New targets were added in 1979. That summer, a newly converted submarine called USS Parche travelled from San Francisco under the North Pole to the Barents Sea, and laid a new cable tap near Murmansk. Its crew received a presidential citation for their achievement. The Okhotsk cable tap ended in 1982, after its location was compromised by a former NSA employee who sold information about the tap, codenamed IVY BELLS, to the Soviet Union. One of the IVY BELLS pods is now on display in the Moscow museum of the former KGB. The cable tap in the Barents Sea continued in operation, undetected, until tapping stopped in 1992.
During 1985, cable-tapping operations were extended into the Mediterranean, to intercept cables linking Europe to West Africa. (30) After the cold war ended, the USS Parche was refitted with an extended section to accommodate larger cable tapping equipment and pods. Cable taps could be laid by remote control, using drones. USS Parche continues in operation to the present day, but the precise targets of its missions remain unknown. The Clinton administration evidently places high value on its achievements, Every year from 1994 to 1997, the submarine crew has been highly commended.(31) Likely targets may include the Middle East, Mediterranean, eastern Asia, and South America. The United States is the only naval power known to have deployed deep-sea technology for this purpose.
Miniaturised inductive taps recorders have also been used to intercept underground cables.(32) Optical fibre cables, however, do not leak radio frequency signals and cannot be tapped using inductive loops. NSA and other Comint agencies have spent a great deal of money on research into tapping optical fibres, reportedly with little success. But long distance optical fibre cables are not invulnerable. The key means of access is by tampering with optoelectronic "repeaters" which boost signal levels over long distances. It follows that any submarine cable system using submerged optoelectronic repeaters cannot be considered secure from interception and communications intelligence activity.
Re:Getting the data back to the NSA... (Score:2)
That would be way too straightforward, and would not use up enough tax dollars.
--
If the Physicists can do it, I'm sure the NSA can (Score:2)
I would be VERY surprised if they don't also have less secret hardware in place on the US ends of these links.
--Mike--
Re:Getting the data back to the NSA... (Score:2)
Tapping the tap on the tap does the same thing, ad infinitum.
--Fesh
Isn't it ironic... (Score:2)
Really? Isn't it ironic that the NSA stands for the very thing thay, behind our backs and behind the scenes, they attempt, and perhaps succeed, to invade? (Hint: What's the S in NSA stand for?)
A little too ironic... And yeah I really do think.
Oh... Democracy at its best, right? (Score:2)
Constitutional Right to Privacy? (Score:2)
One should also consider the Ninth Amendment, or, as I call it, the "elastic clause for the people". It essentially guarantees certain rights beyond those specifically named in the Constitution to protect the people from intrusion and tyranny. While these rights may not simply be assumed, they are protected, and the prevailing code of morality generally decides which rights are protected and which rights are not.
While I am at it, perhaps we should take a peak at the Eighth Amendment as well, which provides that no one shall be subject to cruel or unusual punishment for a crime. Take, for instance, the high school honors graduate that was arrested and will not graduate with her class simply because she had a butter knife in her vehicle at school. Not a butcher's knife. Not a steak knife. A butter knife. She has never shown any violent tendencies, nor has anyone ever reached into a random vehicle for an ordinary household object to threaten the safety of other students. Is it just me, or is "Zero Tolerance" inciting brainless reaction to nothing? Way to go, America.
Re:Constitutional Right to Privacy? (Score:2)
Expectation is the leading cause of disappointment. And Big Money?! Why don't you spell that out for me? I would like to hear your argument about Big Money. (And then I will likely laugh at it.) Part of my point is that our rights can not simply be assumed because we expect them or think we deserve them, or because we think our government is going too far. When we have done the time in the books and know how to run a country, we can become politicians and try to make those changes. The entire world is politics; everyone should be a politician.
"...I believe most aware people want the government to get off our ass. Hell they already take 25% of our paychecks (or more).
*cough* Um, that's most unaware people. All they want is what the news and politicians tell them they want. They don't in any way reason what the purpose for those things are, they just want to make things temporarily better for themselves. Here's a good quote, and I'll give you a quarter if you can find its source: "A republic will collapse when the dumb masses realize they can vote for goodies for themselves." (Sounds like the Democratic agenda to me...)
"Lastly, the example of the girl with butter knife doesn't really have anything to do with cruel and unusual punishment, since no crime was committed in the first place..."
I would like to know how being arrested and forced to miss your graduation is not cruel or unusual punishment for simply owning a butter knife and having it lie silently in your car.
To make another point, I've taken tire irons, car jacks, wrenches, hammers, and many other tools that don't leave my car that I would use as a weapon long before a butter knife, and I have never heard any hint of trouble. In fact, no one in the country has had a problem with those items. I have also taken butter knives and even sharp cutting knives inside my school on days that we have prepared food for our classmates. I know that my school is anal about a lot of things, but at least they think, if only a little, before coming to conclusions about what a student possesses.
Re:Constitutional Right to Privacy? (Score:2)
First of all, the government largely controls (indirectly most of the time) the salaries and wages that people earn. They are not taking any money that you need. Second, because of that, the 75% of your paycheck that you get to keep is exactly what they intended you to keep, and those of us that are aware of how our nation and economy operates don't complain, because we know that it's all part of a necessary system. Third, they're not taking 25%. Maybe 25% of your paycheck.
Without these taxes, our country would simply collapse. It's on the way to doing that anyway, since people are too busy capitalizing on what isn't rightfully theirs, engineering their government to deliver the goods whether they have earned them or not. Way to go, America.
Ooo this one looks deep! (Score:2)
A Message to our friends at NSA (Score:5)
Waihopai, INFOSEC, Information Security, Information Warfare, IW, IS, Priavacy, Information Terrorism, Terrorism Defensive Information, Defense Information Warfare, Offensive Information, Offensive Information Warfare, National Information Infrastructure, InfoSec, Reno, Compsec, Computer Terrorism, Firewalls, Secure Internet Connections, ISS, Passwords, DefCon V, Hackers, Encryption, Espionage, White House, Undercover, NCCS, Mayfly, PGP, PEM, RSA, Perl-RSA, MSNBC, bet, AOL, AOL TOS, CIS, CBOT, AIMSX, STARLAN, 3B2, BITNET, COSMOS, DATTA, E911, FCIC, HTCIA, IACIS, UT/RUS, JANET, JICC, ReMOB, LEETAC, UTU, VNET, BRLO, BZ, CANSLO, CBNRC, CIDA, JAVA, Active X, Compsec 97, LLC, DERA, Mavricks, Meta-hackers, ^?, Steve Case, Tools, Telex, Military Intelligence, Scully, Flame, Infowar, Bubba, Freeh, Archives, Sundevil, jack, Investigation, ISACA, NCSA, spook words, Verisign, Secure, ASIO, Lebed, ICE, NRO, Lexis-Nexis, NSCT, SCIF, FLiR, Lacrosse, Flashbangs, Masuda, Forte, AT, GIGN, Exon Shell, CQB, CONUS, CTU, RCMP, GRU, SASR, GSG-9, 22nd SAS, GEOS, EADA, BBE, STEP, Echelon, Dictionary, MD2, MD4, MDA, MYK, 747,777, 767, MI5, 737, MI6, 757, Kh-11, Shayet-13, SADMS, Spetznaz, Recce, 707, CIO, NOCS, Halcon, Duress, RAID, Psyops, grom, D-11, SERT, VIP, ARC, S.E.T. Team, MP5k, DREC, DEVGRP, DF, DSD, FDM, GRU, LRTS, SIGDEV, NACSI, PSAC, PTT, RFI, SIGDASYS, TDM. SUKLO, SUSLO, TELINT, TEXTA. ELF, LF, MF, VHF, UHF, SHF, SASP, WANK, Colonel, domestic disruption, smuggle, 15kg, nitrate, Pretoria, M-14, enigma, Bletchley Park, Clandestine, nkvd, argus, afsatcom, CQB, NVD, Counter Terrorism Security, Rapid Reaction, Corporate Security, Police, sniper, PPS, ASIS, ASLET, TSCM.
Re:Project was caught (Score:3)
(source, for those who are interested, is Blind Man's Bluff by Sherry Sontag and Christopher Drew, a truly excellent book about undersea espionage during the Cold War).
Ray
I heard the NSA actually decode the data.... (Score:2)
Re:If the Physicists can do it, I'm sure the NSA c (Score:2)
yes, but have you ever seen the amount of equipment needed to do this? At FermiLab, the first stage of data processing is done in the detector circuitry, and occupies a good chunk of the detector's volume (a three story high by 50 meter long piece of equipment, I should mention). Then, an entire floor of a good sized building is filled with racks of mostly custom-built circuitry processes the output of the first stage filters for interesting events.
It's even worse at CERN. They're currently putting up a new building that will be entirely filled with computing hardware to manage the data produced by the experiments when LHC comes online.
Anyway, sure, it's possible to filter that sort of data stream. But could you do it on the seabed? No. I'm not even convinced the NSA could afford many such installations. The price tag for the current incarnation of CDF (one of the primary detectors at FermiLab): around $700 million. And that's using cheap grad student labor to build a good chunk of it.
Re:1m thick? Are you a gringo? (Score:2)
11 acres of supercomputers (Score:2)
Now I see how Cray turned a profit this past quarter and why EMC^2 is doing so well!
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:5)
The basic technique once you've dried it off is to remove the cladding on one side and then bend the fiber slightly and place a detector on the outside.
The bend lets a tiny bit of light out, enough to detect, but not enough (hopefully) to tip off the telecoms engineers.
However doing this does produce a tiny echo on the fiber and it is theoretically possible for the cable operator to find the tap using timed reflectrometry equipment.
Re:Old News --- REALLY Old (Score:3)
just be be precise, this was done inthe Artic ocean.
NOVA had a show (Submarines, Secrets, and Spies [pbs.org]) on it back in Jabuary 1999. See the transcript here [pbs.org]
Maybe things have changed, but according to the special it was maybe halfway there when something went wrong:
It was the highest priority and the biggest budget item in the intelligence budget in the late Reagan administration. They spent about a billion dollars on it, and then it all went away, because of one guy, Pelton.
NARRATOR: Ronald Pelton was analyst working for the National Security Agency who was convicted of spying for the KGB. The on-line tap was one of the operations he compromised.
So this looks like old news, and it might not even be accurate.
Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip
Re:Old News --- REALLY Old (Score:3)
But the modern effort has to do with fiber.
Aside with sheer volume of data, they also have this issue:
Dust or seawater in the submerged chamber could ruin an exposed fiber. Making a surreptitious tap of a live cable would also require circumventing the electrical charge--usually around 10,000 volts--which is used to power the devices that keep the speeding light beams strong.
This is know a "technical difficulties"
Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:2)
Or you could just be trolling... wasn't it Arthur C. Clarke who once said that any sufficiently well-constructed troll would be virtually indistinguishable from routine stupidity?
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:2)
You dumbass, that's my argument. Glad to see that you're not a troll, though... I get along much better with just plain idiots.
For that matter, the Russian embassy tunnel tends to prove my point too. Thanks. They dug that because... wait for it... because they couldn't reliably insert human agents to gather the information more directly! You're arguing in circles. You can't say "Oh, they'd just put an agent in to cover for themselves during the tap," and then turn around and argue about how difficult it is to put an agent in and expect anybody to listen to you. My entire point is that it's not that easy to put a covert agent in. The US intelligence establishment has leaned away from HUMINT and toward SIGINT and high-altitude imaging for years because of that. When you are lucky enough to actually get an agent (and most of them aren't actually US citizens--too difficult to create believable cover) it's very rare to be able to target them into a more favorable position. It's pot-luck; you get what they happen to have access to, not what you would like them to have access to.
Try doing your research by doing something other than watching old Bond flicks sometime.
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:2)
i think the cable in the book was copper (Score:2)
Seriously, though, this is a great book: Like a non-fiction version of some of the early Clancy stories such as The Hunt for Red October. Fun stuff.
Re:Carnivore (Score:2)
With that being said, if they're really tapping underwater transmissions, here are some words that should trip Echelon:
SOMEONE SET UP US THE <BOMB>1!1!
GUN BOMB TERRORIST EVIL KILL ASSASSINATE MORE DEATH METALLICA RIAA MPAA H4x0r 31337 LINUX UNIX RMS OPEN SOURCE
Re:Impossible (Score:2)
Re:Data Overload (Score:2)
Signals Intelligence and Ground Electronic Warfare equipment that is set up to do an unmanned monitor generally scans pseudo-randomly, looking for interesting patterns. When something sufficiently interesting happens, the equipment will alert a human operator, who can investigate, and respond as needed (ie. give that pattern/transmission/etc a higher priority to be monitored.)
My new default email signature: (Score:2)
Cheers,
corvi42
-- Begin NSA Keyword Spam --
Bomb Cocaine President Nuclear Suitcase Bomb
[... you get the idea
Computer Terrorism, Firewalls, Secure Internet Connections, ISS, Passwords,Encryption, Espionage
-- End NSA Keyword Spam --
This was covered in a book published in 1999 (Score:2)
Not surprising. (Score:2)
Haven't we done this in the past? At least the People are sort of aware of it going on this time around. The NSA shouldn't be allowed to operate outside the law, effectively wiretapping the conversations of millions of people at a time without their explicit permission or a court order.
It's a felony punishable by explusion for a student to bring a tape recorder to school to record their teacher's lectures for replay at a later date, because if they don't expressly tell their teacher they are doing so and give them a chance to say no, they are violating federal wiretap laws. Shouldn't the NSA be held to the same standard, or either having to notify the people they are monitoring, or have a court order telling them it is acceptable to do so?
If a government agency suddenly becomes above the law, as the NSA pretty much is, we should be afraid. Monitoring electronic conversations is no more right then monitoring someone's telephone.
Let's all start sending e-mails with words like "C-4", "the President", "bodyguards", "suicide bomb", "PLO", "IRA", "marijuana", and "hijacking" in an effort to flood their computer system with meaningless messages, to force them to stop.
Ohh wait, its been tried before, and failed.
Picture of Cu Cable Tapping Pod & Other Goodies (Score:2)
You can download the full study or others on civil liberties directly from the European Parliament STOA site [eu.int].
As of now on encrypt EVERYTHING! (Score:2)
1. Research on supercomputing in universities will get grants from the government.
2. When you actually need to use encryption on something, they wont bother decrypting it.
Re:Isn't it ironic... (Score:2)
Yes, unfortunately nowadays there are few cables in the world that don't contain information transmitted from the US. When tapping a cable, is the NSA restricted from monitoring US-originated packets, or is the information considered "offshore" the second it leaves our borders?
Re:but how does NSA get the data? (Score:2)
Re:Old News --- REALLY Old (Score:2)
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:2)
Re:This is impossible. Or not. (Score:3)
As for the methods of tapping: With copper, you can just cut the outer casing, spread the wires about, and clamp an inductive pickup over each wire. You don't _have_ to penetrate the last layer of insultion, but if you want a physical splice, even this can be done without interrupting the signal. Any tap does change the impedance, which reflects a small percentage of the incoming signal, and there are (expensive) instruments that can detect this -- but if you cut in between two repeaters, you can pretty well count on that instrument not being built into the repeater. If there aren't too many wires, you might even be able to make an inductive pickup work from a few meters away.
With fiber optics, you also have to cut through individual fiber's cladding. I can't see how you could splice into a fiber optic cable without cutting the signal off entirely for seconds -- in a backbone cable, that's billions of bits gone missing, and I _hope_ a cable operator is going to notice that. But you can bend the cable until a little light starts to escape. Once again, this causes reflections and a little loss of signal strength, which an even more expensive instrument could find. But the next repeater will destroy the evidence, so if you are picking the cable off the sea bottom hundreds of miles out, the only thing that could find the tap is instruments built right into the repeaters -- and that would cost maybe $50K for each repeater, every hundred miles or so, so I don't think they'd do that. Of course, you'd better do a _really_ good job of sealing up the cuts in the cable casing when you are done, or they'll find out about it when the cable goes bad.
On the other hand, tap the London to Paris fiber where it crosses the English channel and you probably will get caught -- probably by the Royal Navy wondering what your sub is doing, but also I'd expect the repeaters to be on dry land where the techs can run tests whenever they get nervous about the condition of the cable.
Re:NSA snippets (Score:2)
Then I thought, fuck it, and got me one of the tanks, instead.
--Blair
"4,096 seeds on the wall, 4,096 seeeeeds..."
Apocryphal Nonsense. Roll Your Eyes at This: (Score:2)
Gimme a break.
Like the NSA went out and glommed onto a fiber a mile underwater without first reading a book on how fiber telecoms work or testing their equipment in a lab. They knew how much data to expect, and a lousy gigabit SONET line isn't going to slow them down a tenth of a percent.
Other nonsense:
The bit about worrying about high voltage. On a sub. Where the water pressure from a pinhole leak can cut your arm off; where the acid-filled batteries weigh more than the conning tower; where a salsa fart can linger for a month; this guy's worried about a double-shielded power line?
The bit about worrying about being detected. The head ends might see a glitch of a few seconds in a fiber--one dropped call--hold their breath for half a minute waiting for it to happen again, then go back to reading their comic books when it doesn't. If a human even gets involved. If not, then the next day when the intern who refills the printer notices a couple of extra log messages on page 13482, he starts a conspiracy theory involving the Navy, the NSA, and sooper-seekrit spy subs. And the U.S. Intelligence Community would never fan a conspiracy theory (MJ-12), would they?
All this story proves is that the Wall Street Journal is still the same bunch of hack-writing, research-cribbing, blind-quoting, three-day-late reporting losers I told where to shove their overpriced subscription ten years ago.
--Blair
Re:but how does NSA get the data? (Score:3)
Re:OTDR Will find splice taps (Score:2)
Project was caught (Score:5)
Thars gold in them thar bits ... (Score:2)
If they're successful at this, perhaps they can then help me with my inbox. My friends and coworkers keeping clogging up my mailbox, keeping me from the messages about "Making $5 mil in 30 days working from home on the Internet" and "Sexy Co-eds want you!"
Don't my friends understand that I could extremely wealthy *and* have bodacious nymphs at my side ... if only I could get to reading their messages! *Sigh*