CBS 60 Minutes: NSA Speaks Out On Snowden, Spying 504
An anonymous reader writes "This week CBS New's 60 Minutes program had a broadcast segment devoted to the NSA, and additional online features. It revealed that the first secret Snowden stole was the test and answers for a technical examination to get a job at NSA. When working at home, Snowden covered his head and screen with a hood so that his girlfriend couldn't see what he was doing. NSA considered the possibility that Snowden left malicious software behind and removed every computer and cable that Snowden had access to from its classified network, costing tens of millions of dollars. Snowden took approximately 1.7 million classified documents. Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns. Snowden's activity caught the notice of other System Administrators. There were also other interesting details, such as the NSA has a highly competitive intern program for High School students that are given a Top Secret clearance and a chance to break codes that have resisted the efforts of NSA's analysts — some succeed. The NSA is only targeting the communications, as opposed to metadata, of less than 60 Americans. Targeting the actual communications of Americans, rather than metadata, requires a probable cause finding and a specific court order. NSA analysts working with metadata don't have access to the name, and can't listen to the call. The NSA's work is driven by requests for information by other parts of the government, and there are about 31,000 requests. Snowden apparently managed to steal a copy of that document, the 'crown jewels' of the intelligence world. With that information, foreign nations would know what the US does and doesn't know, and how to exploit it."
Meta-data (Score:3, Insightful)
We know who your friends are we know where your children go to school, keep quiet and it will all be aright......
Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
Other than lies, lies and more damn lies, what else can NSA come up with ?
No matter how slick or how polished their lies be, NSA's lies are still LIES.
NSA has betrayed America.
NSA has betrayed the Constitution.
NSA is a rogue organization within the government of the United States of America.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Funny)
Other than lies, lies and more damn lies, what else can NSA come up with ?
Statistics!
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
Of all the things said about him by the NSA the one thing that strikes me about the whole case is that nowhere ever is it mentioned he did it for money or anything other than to expose what the NSA was up to to the world.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
As important, even if Snowden was a scurrilous, devious shithead who cheated to get a job and stole that information for all the wrong reasons - as claimed in the interview - , that still in no way vindicates the actions of the NSA. Their methods were both morally and legally untenable and no matter the motives of the whistleblower, it is better that the citizens of the nation (and the world) are aware of the actions of the US government. It's the only way we can possibly hope to rein them in and prevent such abuses in the future. Even if that is a distant fantasy, it has a far greater probability of happening thanks to Snowden's actions. So no matter how the NSA - and the government at large - attempts to deflect the issue with attempts at character assassination, in the end we are still better off knowing their misdeeds.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
Moreover, It's not like he hasn't had the observable precedent of what the government did to vocal dissenters using the "process," namely to maliciously prosecute them and strip them of their retirement even when prosecution fails for the obvious reason that there was no evidence. Thomas Drake is a prime example of that.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Interesting)
Right. The fact that they used the power of the state, specifically the justice dept. to go after people who had done nothing wrong is proof that they control that state power. This is the problem with secret access to secret information. Everything they have everything they do every conversation they have every access by everyone to every system at any time should be memorialized and subject to meaningful audit by truly independent citizens. It's the only way for us to both collect the information we need to protect ourselves and prevent the kind of abuse they meted out to Binney and Drake, which was the whole reason they produced a Snowden in the first place.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
It's to the point that I tend to believe a person is morally right as I hear more and more dirt on them.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
And how would they expect that to be responded to if he did? "Keep your mouth shut if you know what's good for you."
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
If he expected to be treated like previous NSA whistleblowers or previous Obama era whistleblowers/leakers, why would he do that?
At best he could talk to someone like Ron Wyden or Mark Udall. Except they already knew what kind of shit the NSA was doing and couldn't say or do anything about it.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder, sometimes, how much less safe we'd really, actually be if the NSA or a like-organization didn't exist, or at least didn't get access to anything domestically without explicit court order. My guess is that it wouldn't be much, especially since for most cases of terrorism that have been launched from within the US (9/11, Tsasrnaev, Oklahoma City) have seemingly gone off without having triggered a response, especially considering that there was evidence of something being planned from the start that was brought to attention.
I do not think that we are a whole lot safer on account of the NSA. As such, I don't think that the NSA's mission to collect information on Americans can even be justified by a safety argument.
Re: Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:4, Funny)
September 11 happens every year.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
What I find particularly worrying about those statements is that apparently no one else did either. Of everyone working at the NSA, no one did the right thing.
If someone had, and reporting to the inspectors would actually yield something useful, they would definitely have mentioned it to further discredit Snowden. Why would they withhold the proof that their check & balances works? Because there is no proof, because it doesn't work.
The only one who did the right thing, did so while making elaborate plans to escape the country, share the news with enough news agencies and reporters and pretty much all other things you find the good guys in movies doing when they fight the evil government.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
Here are possibilities more clearly laid out:
1) the NSA did nothing wrong
2) the NSA did something wrong, but no one noticed
3) the NSA did something wrong, but no one reported it
4) the NSA did something wrong and people reported it but nothing changed
So which one is it, NSA? (1) is laughable, (2) and (3) put their workforce in bad light, and (4) justifies Snowden's approach.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Informative)
For starters -- Snowden didn't steal anything: he copied it (minor detail).
What Snowden did was compared to killing 10 people. Snowden didn't kill anyone.
We were told that NSA can't access information unless they had a warrant: Again, false on many occasions, some documented here on
Anyone else notice: They have ACTUAL phone numbers, the REAL ones. Google your own phone number some time to see about so-called meta-data.
No mention of what the NSA had been doing - in violation of court orders (only a brief and casual mention of so-called accidental overstepping). I call BS on this one.
I had hoped that 60 minutes would do an insightful - investigation into NSA. What I heard from so-called reporter John Miller was a PR fluff piece that one would expect as a former national spokesman for the FBI.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:4, Insightful)
I love how a warrant awarded in secret with contents that are secret to collect data that will be kept secret is supposed to ok this type of behavior.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Informative)
...John Miller was a PR fluff piece that one would expect as a former national spokesman for the FBI
That's the real story here. The person who did the "reporting" has a clear conflict of interest. 60 Minutes used to be known for doing some hard hitting investigative journalism. My respect for 60 Minutes went down the toilet last night. It's not just John Miller who's the problem here. Clearly the management of CBS must know about his past work history - and they don't care. This is also the same organization that just mucked up their Benghazi reporting. 60 Minutes has gone from being a news program to be proud of to being a stain on the entire CBS network. CBS is turning into FOX with lipstick.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
60 Minutes has a long list of journalistic fuckups, misrepresentations, poor research and intellectual dishonesty going back at least 30 years.
I'm just surprised to see them so flagrantly sit at the right hand of the Ministry of Truthiness, as they did in this piece.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:4, Insightful)
I had hoped that 60 minutes would do an insightful - investigation into NSA. What I heard from so-called reporter John Miller was a PR fluff piece that one would expect as a former national spokesman for the FBI.
It's perfectly in line with what famous linguist Noam Chomsky told us about the media decades ago. [youtube.com] ABC and 60 minutes are some of the most blatantly bullshit of the mainstream media, rivaling Fox News. From airing things like "D is for Dad and Dumb" -- the weekend of father's day? [parents.com], to writing hit-pieces about human rights websites [staresattheworld.com] claiming coordinated harassment of Anita Sarkeesian while ignoring her blatant confirmation bias and clear evidence of victim-farming con artistry, [youtube.com] it's clear they do not present an objective or unbiased news source. It's also clear ABC are intentionally deceptive and seem to be harboring and furthering a sexist anti-male agenda.
It's quite strange -- When I was younger I had assumed they were good; 60min was what grown-ups watched... right? It would be some kind of tin-foil-hatter conspiracy theory to think they weren't trustworthy news sources... right? Nope. Apparently Chomsky knew what he was talking about, and it applies now more than ever.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
When someone asks the NSA the question, "Are you widely*collecting* information on millions of Americans?" and the answer given is that they "can only *target* Americans with a court order," then they are not answering the question that was asked. This is the way that they've been dodging this issue from the beginning, and I'm not sure that most people are noticing this.
They should have been called on this. It was bad journalism.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Interesting)
NSA IS the government of the United States.
No, the NSA Surveillance Destroys Diplomacy and Democracy: [huffingtonpost.com]
How do democratically elected officials (the president, congressmen or senators) get control of a stand-alone secret government bureaucracy that was operating long before they arrived and will survive them after they've gone? A bureaucracy that knows everything there is to know about them, too?
They don't. They can't. So the surreptitious, illicit actions of a US spy agency can undermine the diplomatic work of months and years. And the president - the elected official chosen to lead the country - is so hamstrung by the NSA that he cannot stop the interceptions and order an immediate investigation.
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't. They can't. So the surreptitious, illicit actions of a US spy agency can undermine the diplomatic work of months and years.
For example, imagine what would happen if the spooks simply made up a story that a country had (and/or had recently used) weapons of mass destruction, and provided what appeared to be actionable intelligence to the politicians who were theoretically in charge. I mean, there's no way the wise politicians wouldn't see through that and overwhelmingly move to start a war over nothing, right?
Re:Lie-fest from the NSA (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, precisely. And some smart people have also pointed out that they may have tried to do the exact same thing with Syria, since an apparent chemical weapons attack came shortly after Obama said that the use of chemical weapons would trigger a US military response.
You get the impression at least some of these guys are the modern version of Vizzini from the Princess Bride: "I'm trying to start a war here! It's a prestigious line of work, with a long and glorious tradition."
Re: (Score:3)
"Maybe he's too hamstrung or maybe he likes what the NSA is doing. Obama has in no way been clear enough for us to determine which one of those is true."
The President isn't "hamstrung" at all. He's the Chief Executive, and the NSA is an Executive organization. The President can order an investigation at any time. He can send them all home for a paid (or even unpaid) vacation. Congress may write the laws, but the President is, in effect, the CEO. As long as he's not breaking Congress' (or any other) law, he can tell them to do what he pleases.
There are LOTS of things the President can do. The simple fact that he has not tells us that he does not want to.
Re:Meta-data (Score:4, Insightful)
Metadata is nothing more than data to begin with. This distinction is absolutely absurd. Capturing the actual data wouldn't really be any more difficult for them, so how is that magically more private? It isn't. They're just abusing past irrelevant, ignorant court decisions for their own gain.
Re: (Score:3)
"How many acres of hard drives would it take to store everyone's cellphone conversations?"
That can be answered with a few assumptions and some basic math.
First, let's say "everyone" consists of all US citizens. Let's say there are 320M citizens in the US. Let's add another 30 million tourists and/or illegal aliens bringing the total to 350M.
Now let's say everyone talks to each other 1 hour per day on average. That would total 175M hours of conversation to record per day, or 10,500,000,000 minutes. MP3 can e
WTF should we *believe* the NSA? (Score:3)
Rah! Rah! NSA! (Score:5, Insightful)
So it sounds like it will be pro-NSA spin-doctoring from our crony-corporatist media.
Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They've been "making their case" for years. This is nothing but spin doctoring and character assassination not an honest debate.
Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! (Score:4, Insightful)
but they have been lying about their position many times.
also, why would NSA consider amnesty for Snowden? it is not NSA's job to consider that nor is it in their jurisdiction, at least it's not supposed to be.
less than 60 americans? so 10 million in equipment per? really? shouldn't the number be zero anyways and surveillance on those sixty americans be done by the FBI?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! (Score:4, Insightful)
For a liar to be caught in a lie, he has to speak first.
Oh so someone other than James "Least Untruthful Answer" Clapper [washingtonpost.com] or the Jean-Luc Picard wannabe Keith Alexander [theguardian.com]? I'm pretty sure both of them having been saying lots of things.
Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! (Score:5, Insightful)
And they can do this without resorting to channels that are known first and primarily as propaganda machines.
Because, and let us be honest here, part of the reason why we are in this position is that the media in the US are not there to provide the informational bulwark so that we may function as close to an ideal republic as we can. They currently exist to sell us things and to make us feel better out said purchases. This extends to the government at all levels. Who better to give an interview to than the very apparatus that is there to appease and not investigate?
Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! (Score:5, Insightful)
In some ways the NSA are their own worst enemy in this situation. Snowden leaked huge quantities of documents directly from the horse's mouth, so to speak, that broadly incriminates the NSA of a host of crimes they were supposedly able to self-regulate against. The problem they have now is one of credibility - they have no channel through which to put out their version of the story that will allow it to carry the same credibility as Snowden's leak.
I work in the media sector and myself and know that no self-respecting spin doctor could get this so badly wrong as it seems on the surface - there was a target demographic of supreme importance that they hit square in the face for some reason. Not that I can go looking for them from the other side of the pond...
Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! (Score:5, Informative)
Um.... what do you call CBS if not a channel through which "they" can put out their version of the story?
How can CBS verify that the NSA is doing what they claim to be doing? For example, there's this claim that the NSA is only spying on 60 or so US citizens. How would CBS know that versus the NSA spying on 60 million US citizens? CBS has no way to distinguish this because all of that is secret. They're just a higher visibility platform than some vanity blog with three readers. They have no more ability to bring credibility to the claims that the NSA makes.
Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! (Score:5, Insightful)
the surveillance agencies need to be able to state their position.
Surveillance agencies should not even have an opinion. Their job is to do what The People tell them to do. Their job is not to advocate for any position.
Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! (Score:5, Insightful)
CBS has never been anything other than sucking at the teat of corporatism. It's not an accident they didn't cover the arab spring, OWS or anything other than pro-us government leaning views until they were widely broadcast everywhere else.
In short - if it's affiliated with any TV network public or private, then you're not the customer. The corporations are.
Re:Wonder why NSA didn't go to Fox network first ? (Score:5, Informative)
Plus they got an utter insider to pretend to be a journalist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Miller_(journalist) [wikipedia.org]
" He is the former Associate Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Analytic Transformation and Technology.[1] Prior to that, he was an Assistant Director of Public Affairs for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), where he was the bureau's national spokesman."
Re: (Score:3)
Left and Right parties don't really exist in the USA. Both sides are basically moderate with some takes on eachother's side. It's a misnomer to think that they are any different than tea party or libertarians, either. Some people believe there's a divide, but when it comes to corporatism all sides are willing to sell out to the same sources.
Any news source associated with the above will out tea party messages, it's just a question of how obfuscated. Is it that CBS re-broadcasts's faux news, or is it that t
Re:Wonder why NSA didn't go to Fox network first ? (Score:5, Funny)
Strange bedfellows and all that. I bet there were some surreal scenes when the anti-NSA protest groups gathered, met their usual opposition, read each other's placards and banners, did a double take, then started checking their directions to make sure they were at the right protest. Hell, you want to really freak them out, get Tammy Baldwin and Sarah Palin on the same soapbox denouncing the NSA, it'll be the most ambivalent crowd in history.
But seriously folks, between the UK and the US, I don't think there's one decent, credible politician with even the slightest scrap of meaningful power making themselves heard right now.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So it sounds like it will be pro-NSA spin-doctoring from our crony-corporatist media.
I was thinking that 60 Minutes is now broadcasting fiction.
Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns.
Assuming that's true ...
Like they'd do anything about it and if he did, he could kiss his job good-bye and he would be told to shut up. And even if he ignored them and started blabbing on the Internet and media, who'd believe him? Without documentation, he's just another conspiracy theorist.
Targeting the actual communications of Americans, rather than metadata, requires a probable cause finding and a specific court order.
Yep, it does require it but they don't give a shit. They do it anyway.
NSA analysts working with metadata don't have access to the name, and can't listen to the call.
I do NOT believe this. Anyone who does is a rube.
Re: (Score:3)
Given enough "meta data" you can actually construct a reasonable facsimile of what the data actually is. In some cases, it is more valuable than the data itself.
Re: (Score:3)
Somehow, this NSA infomercial neglected to mention that Gen. Clapper was part of Geo. Bush's "fabricated WMD intel in Iraq" team, and lied his ass off on behalf of the Bush administration and WMDs in Iraq.
Somehow, we still don't have any forensic audits to see how many millions are wasted daily at the CIA, NSA and DIA (by wasted, one means they are bot
Stole exam answers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Stole exam answers? (Score:5, Insightful)
I was thinking the exact same thing when I watched it. Guess they couldn't trump up a rape charge, so that was the best they could do (for now, anyway).
Re:Stole exam answers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Stole exam answers? (Score:5, Funny)
I know it marks me as a giant nerd, but that still makes me think of the written chuunin exam in Naruto, where the whole point was to cheat on it without getting caught...
The Threat Narrative Goes Both Ways (Score:4, Insightful)
So he broke into a secure environment, serruptitiously obtained confidential and/or classified information, and used his take to successfully gain a competive advantage over his peers? And somehow this makes him unsuitable for employment at the NSA?
I guess it's a good thing he wasn't a state sponsored spy... I mean, just imagine what would happen if there were multiple powerful nations with "cyber armies" that wanted at that data and the gall to infiltrate and spy on the USA / NSA. Why, all that data would just be ripe for the taking, like a huge single point of failure. The NSA would be a huge threat to national security. I mean, wow, Snowden was a contractor; Just imagine if he had been a really bad guy trained in computer exploitation and given a big budget to buy any zero-day exploit on the black market he needed? Wow, scary stuff NSA. I guess they'll be shutting down now that the biggest threat to national security has been identified as the NSA itself... right?
Re:Stole exam answers? (Score:5, Insightful)
The character assassination of Snowden begins
No, it began when the Scotland Yard and the GCHQ tried to pin Snowden with the Pedophiles.
http://slashdot.org/story/13/11/07/038216/edward-snowden-leaks-could-help-paedophiles-escape-police-says-uk-government [slashdot.org]
Then NSA returned the favor and attacked Julian Assange
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/12/13/012210/was-julian-assange-involved-with-wiretapping-icelands-parliament [slashdot.org]
This is the third round.
There will be a fourth, a fifth, a sixth, and their intention is very simple -
The want to fill the media media with LIES.
They want to fill the world with SO MUCH LIES that nobody can discern truth from lies.
Re:Stole exam answers? (Score:5, Informative)
Forbes just put out a counter balancing piece that refutes that narrative.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/12/16/an-nsa-coworker-remembers-the-real-edward-snowden-a-genius-among-geniuses/ [forbes.com]
Re:Stole exam answers? (Score:5, Funny)
ooooOOOOOoooohhh...
Now it's clear why he jumped ship and spilled the beans on the NSA:
Snowden had been brought to Hawaii as a cybersecurity expert working for Dell’s services division but due to a problem with the contract was reassigned to become an administrator for the Microsoft intranet management system known as Sharepoint.
As a developer who was once given the task of managing and developing Sharepoint, I find his actions to be perfectly balanced and justifiable.
Seriously Impressed (Score:3)
Snowden has shown the incompetance of the NSA. Not only did he betray their trust and make off with millions of incriminating documents. He showed their entire selection process flawed and insecure apparently. If I got this straight, he hacked and stole their exame so that he could qualify for entrance into the NSA.
Well if Snowden is just a stupid twit as the NSA likes to put forth, then anyone could of done this, and the NSA is in really sore shape.
fixed 2006 link (Score:3)
sorry, here's the 2006 link:
http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm [usatoday.com]
From TFA:
The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.
Oh NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
>Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns.
Good idea too. Everyone else who did (that we know of) was fired and investigated. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Andrews_Drake [wikipedia.org]
>The NSA is only targeting the communications, as opposed to metadata, of less than 60 Americans. Targeting the actual communications of Americans, rather than metadata, requires a probable cause finding and a specific court order.
We don't believe you, and quit targeting my metadata without a warrant.
Re:Oh NSA (Score:4, Insightful)
And approaching supervisors worked pretty well for Manning... [/sarcasm]
Re:Oh NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
And yes, metadata can easily be more intrusive than content.
Re:Oh NSA (Score:5, Informative)
Exactly. It's weasel words. "We're only targeting 60 Americans" might be true, but it leaves an impression that they're only capturing data on 60 Americans when what it really means is "We're capturing metadata on EVERY American, but most of that data goes into our servers to be accessed/searched on later. Right now, we're only looking at the actual communications for 60 Americans, but that could change at any moment if we deem it to be needed for any reason we think up."
Re:Oh NSA (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh NSA (Score:5, Informative)
FTA: Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns.
I was a Federal whisteblower, on two cases. Being a whistleblower will get you followed, framed, and fired — at the least. In my case, additional, externally directed efforts were made to strangle me financially, and to destroy my career.
Don't do it. They will destroy you.
I know what you're trying to do (Score:3)
Re:I know what you're trying to do (Score:4, Insightful)
If we can't trust our government, then we can't trust each other.
Oh really? I think you'll find that it's quite easy to trust the majority of our fellow human beings, those who haven't tried to set themselves up in a position of false authority, while simultaneously refusing to trust governments or other criminal organizations trying to rule over us.
Re: (Score:3)
Does not follow.
I trust a lot of people. Not trusting the government doesn't make me trust any particular individual less (or more).
Contrariwise, trusting the government doesn't make me trust any individual more (or less).
The NSA is so Credible (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The NSA is so Credible (Score:5, Insightful)
If they're willing to openly lie to Congress, does anyone think for a second they wouldn't openly lie to the press? When NSA reps speak now, I don't even bother listening for how they parse their language. They're not even trying to *technically* tell the truth--they're just flat out lying, period.
Re:The NSA is so Credible (Score:5, Informative)
They didn't lie to the press, they WERE the press.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Miller_(journalist) [wikipedia.org]
" He is the former Associate Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Analytic Transformation and Technology.[1] Prior to that, he was an Assistant Director of Public Affairs for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), where he was the bureau's national spokesman."
Re: (Score:3)
The people like cold fjord who would continually piss themselves over "Mooslem" boogeymen without Big Brother tucking them in at night. 9/10 chance that this "anonymous" person is cold fjord.
Re:The NSA is so Credible (Score:4, Interesting)
The funny thing is how few of the comments in the media talk about the Snowden's case in the only context that makes even the pro-national-security-collect-everything guys stop and think.
As far as we know, the guy wasn't being paid for this. Wasn't specifically pre-trained for this. Had no external help. Just look what he managed to get access to. Now couple this with the thinking behind the "I told you" comments saying "see, it was possible and bam! the NSA was actually doing it". Now see how many people the NSA has.
The discussion whether the utility of having these data trumps privacy or constitutionality concerns is moot. Snowden showed the honestly funny truth. If he could do it, other competent intelligence agencies are doing it. NSA is in fact (unintentionally, of course) collecting data on Americans for Russians/Chinese/whoever. They are a wonderful source - a bit hard to get to, but once you do...
The NSA wants to stop any attempts to restrict its data collection (citing national security), because regaining lost privileges is a bit hard and they like what they have. But - as explained above - national security dictates that NSA's data collection should be immediately minimized. Know what you must and control it. As you grow, you're easier to penetrate. As is, Snowden made NSA look like a glaring hole in the security of US of A. Ironic, isn't it?
Not that I care. Not my country, not my business...
Whoa ... an APOLOGIST !! (Score:5, Insightful)
In the balance of power/abuses, I'd still consider the NSA more appropriate than say... the Chinese/Russian equivalent ...
Just look at the modus operandi of the apologists ...
They are actually TRYING VERY HARD to compare an apple to an orange !
RUSSIA and CHINA are NOT democratic countries.
THEIR GOVERNMENTS are RUTHLESS and VERY AUTOCRATIC, and they have the power to PERSECUTE, and even EXECUTE their people WITHOUT REASON.
I am from China. I know what I am talking about !
On the other hand, the United States of America is supposed to be A DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY - where *LAWS* are obeyed, and even the government has to OBEY THE LAWS.
NSA is NOT an apparatus of the Russian nor an apparatus of the Chinese government.
NSA is a branch of the government of the United States of America.
Which means, NSA has the OBLIGATION to operate ACCORDING TO WHAT HAS BEEN CLEARLY STATED IN THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Has NSA done that ?
Nope.
NSA has VIOLATED the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA !
Apologist, you are forewarned !
We will hunt you down, no matter where the fuck you are !
Re:The NSA is so Credible (Score:4, Insightful)
But as an American, I could not care less how bad the proverbial boogeymen "other countries" are. It is the US government that has the power to arrest me, not the goons running some random African hellhole.
Biased much? (Score:5, Insightful)
Could this be more biased in favour of the NSA? I don't think so. It reads as pure propaganda.
The fact is - the NSA, and the US government, has consistently been lying to the American people. Consistently. The Guardian publishes one thing, the US responds, and then the Guardian publishes another clearly indicating how the US government lied. Time and time again. How many times do we have to go over this?
Cables are dangerous (Score:5, Funny)
NSA considered the possibility that Snowden left malicious software behind and removed every computer and cable that Snowden had access to from its classified network, costing tens of millions of dollars.
Because next time I write a virus, I will use it to infect a UTP cable.
Re:Cables are dangerous (Score:4, Informative)
Cables are dangerous.
http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Takes+a+Page+From+Monsters+Book+Offers+50+Thunderbolt+Cable/article22041.htm [dailytech.com]
That nice looking molded CAT6 cable could have any number of surprises inside...
Re: (Score:3)
I know you're being funny, but the NSA does have a reason to get rid of all hardware too.
http://www.spybusters.com/Great_Seal_Bug.html [spybusters.com]
In theory a cable could be used as an antenna, they probably have some working group at the NSA that does just that, hell they probably think Snowden stole the document about it.
Snowball animal farm Snowden from reality (Score:3, Insightful)
Entrance exam (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
neutralize the proctor for extra credit
Puff piece (Score:5, Interesting)
Never asked the obvious questions. "If you really aren't storing all our emails and phone calls, then why do you need to build a new $1.5 billion facility [wikipedia.org] to hold exabytes of data storage? Either you're lying or you're guilty of a SERIOUS misappropriation of funds. So which is it?"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Have you considered that maybe they need to store data that's not your e-mails and phone calls? I mean, their focus is primarily foreign surveillance.
Crocodile Tears (Score:5, Insightful)
Not having access to 60-minutes in the UK, it would seem the main thrust of the NSA's argument is that the system has checks and balances for exactly this sort of situation, and that Snowden should have notified the right people about his findings rather than go public. What it doesn't seem to mention is that these very same people should already have known about this - everyone whose responsibility it was to either refrain from these actions or say "No" when someone else asked if they were allowed had already said "Yes" so I think removing the system's responsibility for self-regulation by public release in that context is exactly the right thing to do.
By trying to paint Snowden's actions as irresponsible by failing to follow the preapproved script for this sort of violation, they are also trying to cover the arses of the self-regulators by claiming ignorance of the matter on their behalf. It's simultaneously a smear-attack on Snowden and an attempt to save the faces of the people he's made like utter f***wits. The logic-fail in this case is that they can't cover up what we already know from their own documents happened, so the ignorance play only makes the self-regulation argument even weaker as, prior to Snowden's releases, it had already comprehensively failed to protect those in it's charge over a long period of time.
Re: (Score:3)
Snowden should have notified the right people about his findings rather than go public
My reaction was that he did go to the right people. MY government has no right to keep secrets about what it is doing in regards to ME.
Believability Deficit (Score:5, Insightful)
So an organization whose existence is predicated on lying, and whose employees, from the top of the food chain to the bottom of the food chain, have done nothing but lie to their country, from the top of the food chain to the bottom of the food chain, goes on a national TV show and says stuff that we are supposed to believe?
Either the NSA is staffed by utter morons, or they think we are the utter morons. There is a huge believability deficit in that agency, and an enormous cognitive disconnect among its leaders. It's yet another federal agency that needs a large funding reduction, and whose leaders need many years of therapy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The 60-Minutes episode was not directed to you. The whole purpose was to "educate" the major part of the American people that are not certain what is going on but are absolutely sure that they need protection from the unknown enemy. After months of bad press, the NSA needed a well-scripted PR boost, and CBS was willing to give it to them.
The sad truth is that a vast majority of the American people do not want to spend the time to analyze the raw data and come to their own conclusion. They want small, pre-di
Cryptoanalysis? (Score:3, Insightful)
John Miller: How are you approaching that? Can you show me?
Joe: We are looking at this data here and it is a bunch of random numbers on the screen.
John Miller: That looks a tad overwhelming.
Joe: It is."
They are trying to determine if the numbers are random by looking at them on the screen? If this was how they were doing cryptoanalysis at the NSA, we could all sleep better. Of course, as noted above, there's no reason to believe any information provided in an obvious propaganda piece like this one.
but where are the Golden Tablets? (Score:3, Funny)
Sounds like he was channeling Joseph Smith.
CBS interviewer is an intelligence guy himself (Score:3, Interesting)
His lips are moving (Score:3)
The Running Man (Score:4, Interesting)
[Amber is being introduced to the audience as a special guest 'runner'] ...Later, she cheated on College exams. Then she had sexual relations with three, sometimes even four men within a single year. Then came Mad Dog Ben Richards, her *Confederate*, her LOVER!
Phil Hiton:
Amber: That's a lie!
Damon Killian: Let's reunite these two lovebirds!
[audience cheers]
Damon Killian: [Amber is sent down to the game zone]
"
Sponsored (Score:5, Funny)
This episode of 60 minutes was brought to you by NSA
Tell one lie and you lose credibility (Score:5, Insightful)
Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns.
Ya, because he'd rather spend the rest of his life a fugitive, essentially exiled from his home country and family under fear of rotting in solitary confinement in a military prison without charge. He'd rather do this than simply follow the perfectly effective checks and balances this completely innocent organization is government by.
How stupid do they think we are?
Interesting admission of weakness (Score:3)
NSA considered the possibility that Snowden left malicious software behind and removed every computer and cable that Snowden had access to from its classified network, costing tens of millions of dollars.
The fact that they think such an attack could take place and that their best defense would be to take every piece of equipment that could be tainted and kill it with fire tells me that the NSA's IDS systems are extremely weak, its NIDS especially. I think this is the first bit of news that compromises security at the NSA, and they admitted it willingly. Sounds like the NSA is VASTLY better at attack than defense, which apparently consists of carefully screening everything that's allowed on their network (down to their TEMPEST-proof HQ) and then crossing their fingers.
BIOS Attack? (Score:5, Informative)
The BIOS attack mentioned in the article was really telling about how the spin machine works: To Quote:
This is the BIOS system which starts most computers. The attack would have been disguised as a request for a software update. If the user agreed, the virus would’ve infected the computer.
John Miller: So, this basically would have gone into the system that starts up the computer, runs the systems, tells it what to do.
Debora Plunkett: That's right.
John Miller: --and basically turned it into a cinderblock.
Debora Plunkett: A brick.
John Miller: And after that, there wouldn't be much you could do with that computer.
Debora Plunkett: That's right. Think about the impact of that across the entire globe. It could literally take down the U.S. economy.
First off, a BIOS attack? Really? Welcome to the 1980's!
Secondly, Request for software update to attack BIOS? Have you tried to update your BIOS? It aint that easy and any bios made since the late 80's has safeguards to prevent BIOS updates in the way that's described.
Thirdly, to brick enough computers to ruin the US economy using a bios update would be practically impossible. Never mind that such an attack would have to target people stupid enough to apply updates to systems in locked server rooms. Good luck with that!
Finally, this whole article just demonstrated how they just don't 'get it'. They collect data on you and your loved ones but they don't "look" at it because "that" would be illegal. And if they get caught well then it's "their PR" which is bad, not their actions.
And surely hacking the answers to cheat on a test to be a spy surely qualifies you for the job by default?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What is even more funny (and telling) about the reporting on this is that the NSA people in the interview claimed the NSA stopped this attack and then CBS reported that directly with no question about whether this was legitamate or not. They claim this would have bricked all the computers, which presumably includes the one I am typing this message on. So we are just told they stopped the attack... how.
Seriously, how the fuck did they do that?
They claim China wrote some super virus that could brick the bio
I know it's counter intuitive (Score:5, Insightful)
but privacy is the culprit here. The NSA can go rogue because they have way too much privacy of a certain type, the "it never happened" type privacy, not the "no one knows what we are now talking about " privacy.
They can plan and plot in a dark so dark no one can ever know what was said. That has to go. Every single they do, speak, write , everywhere they go, every access to every computer system anyone there ever avails themselves of has to be memorialized into an incorruptible audit trail which can "replayed" and otherwise analyzed by investigative authorities given the proper authorization to do so.
To start with the premise that "we don't need this surveillance" is to concede the argument before it's even begun.
You can't win an argument starting with a false picture of reality. We DO need this level of surveillance. We DO need these systems and we will need them even more going forward. That is a highly unpleasant fact about reality. We need new thinking here.
So how do we stop an agency with that much assymetrical information from leveraging it into domestic political or global economic power and thus consuming on the one had our democracy and on the other our legitimacy as a world power?
The answer is to make it impossible to abuse the system AND ALSO get away with it, both.
The people in charge there now need to be moved out. People like Binney and Drake and Snowden - all true patriots- who KNOW how this technology can and is abused need to be put into positions of power. The old guard would never ever permit that , even to the point of staging a coup d'tat . Obama needs his own, legitimate, Sunday Night Massacre (Nixon 1973) there and he needs to move all at once and very suddenly with a clear vision of how that agency is going to be going forward.
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. We need the NSA and what it does. We need more of the same from the NSA in fact. But we need the contingency of ironclad transparency into the organization also.
If you take the long view, it was predictable even obvious that the individuals who "came of age" in the NSA during the digital revolution would attempt to leverage their newly invented and secret powers into an position of untouchability and engage in lawlessness. These guys have a god complex the size of a mountain, and they can have and will continue to demonize, including in their own minds, anyone who opposes their personal vision of what their careers and lives are all about, what their mission is and the best way to achieve that mission.
No point in picking their psychology apart, the point is they need to be relieved of duty and also we need to implement totalitarian-level of accounting within the organization that any lawbreaker will fear, even as we continue to spy as we have been, pushing the technological limits of what can be uncovered on our very real enemies.
Re:NSA Does Damage Control (Score:5, Insightful)
It always cracks me up when whsiteblowers are criticized for not contacting their superiors with the information first--as if it's not THOSE VERY SAME SUPERIORS who aren't the ones PERPETUATING THE WRONGDOING IN THE FIRST PLACE.
"Sir I think this Adolph Hitler may be nuts!"
"Well, then you must report this concern to Herr Hitler immediately!"
Re:A lot more truth than the imagination of outsid (Score:5, Insightful)
Having a computer store metadata that you don't try to hide from private companiees just isn't that big of a deal.
Actually many people do try to hide them from private companies. But even if this statement was entirely true, there is a big difference between what a corporation can do with the metadata vs what the government can do. Last time I checked, Google isn't able to send out a drone to extrajudicially kill a US citizen.
Re:A lot more truth than the imagination of outsid (Score:5, Insightful)
You have got to be kidding. NSA specifically targeted an American company and copied their inter-data-center traffic for surveillance purposes, thereby stealing the personal information and papers and effects of millions of US citizens. You try that and let me know how prison treats you -- it's prohibited from both a civil rights and constitutional standpoint. It's a criminal act.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The LOVEINT scandal is one of the perfect examples of how that statement is patently bullshit. Unless they're going to claim that the FISA court is giving out LOVEINT warrants now.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, the public is dumb. However, the NSA had their secret rooms in telco-buildings slurping up the data for decades, Omnivore, Carnivore, ECHELON, Five-eyes, etc. Google it. the PATRIOT Act retroactively granted immunity to the ISPs for their assistance in breaking the 4th amendment prior to 9/11.... Ahem... prior to 9/11. So, they had decades of warrantless wiretapping and failed to prevent 9/11, then we gave them carte blanche spying capability and they failed to prevent the Boston Marathon bombing.