Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Communications Government United States

Top NSA Official Raised Alarm About Metadata Program In 2009 110

An anonymous reader sends this report from the Associated Press: "Dissenters within the National Security Agency, led by a senior agency executive, warned in 2009 that the program to secretly collect American phone records wasn't providing enough intelligence to justify the backlash it would cause if revealed, current and former intelligence officials say.

The NSA took the concerns seriously, and many senior officials shared them. But after an internal debate that has not been previously reported, NSA leaders, White House officials and key lawmakers opted to continue the collection and storage of American calling records, a domestic surveillance program without parallel in the agency's recent history.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Top NSA Official Raised Alarm About Metadata Program In 2009

Comments Filter:
  • by ValentineMSmith ( 670074 ) on Friday November 21, 2014 @04:56PM (#48437185)

    If only the NSA listened as well as the NSA listens, we wouldn't be in this situation.

    • The people who choose to be spooks are ordinary people, just like you and me. Many of them choose to become spooks because of their patriotic feeling towards their respective countries, and their willingness to do everything they can (within the confine of the laws, of course) to contribute to the well being of their motherland/fatherland

      Not all spooks from CIA/NSA are bad dudes either. There are conscientious people within those organizations because I do have friends (close friends) working in there

      On the

      • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
        Re continued, and expanded
        With domestic surveillance now been talked about more in public the press now understands what keywords and interviews will result in.
        The media can wait to type a report into a networked computer just before publication.
        A journalist can also fill their networked computer with a lot of non fiction that reads like a real story thats been worked on.
        Drive out with a phone on to meet a person with more information.
        All the domestic surveillance teams have is networking. The connec
        • by dbIII ( 701233 )

          Drive out with a phone on to meet a person with more information.

          Thanks to the influence of such groups as the NSA your mobile phone transmits it's data in an easily readable format instead of something encrypted such as was first proposed for the devices. The performers "Negativeland" some years back demonstrated that very clearly with analogue phones, and apparently it's not much more difficult now with digital but it can land you in legal deep shit if you do it and you are not a government associated bo

          • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
            Re "Thanks to the influence of such groups as the NSA your mobile phone transmits it's data in an easily readable format instead of something encrypted such as was first proposed for the devices"
            Thats the idea. Fill the gps logs with random trips to locations that fit in well with the non fiction "story" on a networked computer.
            Who was that journalists phone around or who did it stop near? How would it fit in with a story been worked on? So many new digital hops to follow up on thanks to one random dri
      • by Anonymous Coward

        Not all spooks from CIA/NSA are bad dudes either.

        Yes, they are. You don't accidentally do evil on this scale, and these people have absolutely no excuse. They have betrayed their country, their friends and family, and their morals. Saying things like "they aren't all bad!" is almost as bad as saying the same thing about people running drug cartels. I say "almost" because at least those drug cartels don't pretend to be on your side.

        • Not all of them are working on the domestic spying. The NSA, believe it or not, was created to spy on other countries, not Americans.

        • They have betrayed their country

          While I will agree with you that some of the NSA spooks have betrayed the United States of America, I do need to point out that it's the POLITICIANS who are the biggest traitors of all

          Politicians in Washington DC, many of them, no matter if they are Democrats or Republicans, do not care about America. They only care about power (unlimited power), money (enormous amount of money), and getting re-elected, again, and again and again, ad nauseum

        • By that logic, I can extend your argument to "All Americans are bad dudes" because they have done nothing to rein in the US Military complex, US IP complex, US entertainment complex and US meddling in foreign politics, not to mention the doubletalk used in dealing with the US itself.

          Don't demonize others for not doing things you haven't done yourself, nor make them guilty by association, unless you're willing to be called out as similarly guilty.

          • By that logic, I can extend your argument to "All Americans are bad dudes" because they have done nothing to rein in the US Military complex, US IP complex, US entertainment complex and US meddling in foreign politics, not to mention the doubletalk used in dealing with the US itself.

            No you can't, because that's not the same logic. People working directly for an evil organization that conducts mass surveillance is absolutely different from merely being a citizen of a country that does evil things. By remaining with the evil organization, you are helping them conduct mass surveillance far more than if you were merely a citizen of the country they operate in.

            But if there are people in the NSA that are good people, then they are certainly planning to leak information like Snowden did or ot

    • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Yes it goes back to the Trailblazer Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
      ThinThread https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
      Before that was Main Core https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
      Recall Project MINARET https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
      and going way back to the The Armed Forces Security Agency (AFSA) with Project SHAMROCK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by davester666 ( 731373 )

      don't fall for it. this story is only part of managing the the snowden revelations.

      this is to try to minimize that he came forward and told the public instead of going through "proper channels", by making it seem that others had gone through proper channels, and that everything had been carefully scrutinized and it was all on the up and up.

      "NSA took the concerns seriously, and many senior officials shared them" = "wow. this looks so wrong. let's do it anyway because we can. and puppies, pedophiles and t

  • by zieroh ( 307208 ) on Friday November 21, 2014 @04:59PM (#48437207)

    the program to secretly collect American phone records wasn't providing enough intelligence to justify the backlash it would cause if revealed

    File that under "duh".

  • by Lilith's Heart-shape ( 1224784 ) on Friday November 21, 2014 @05:03PM (#48437237) Homepage
    It's time to abolish the NSA.
  • GOOD. When people fear the government, there is tyrrany. When government fears the people, there is freedom.

    I would also like to add that, when there is little barrier to tracking the calls of mundane political opponents, or even listening in to their calls, than a check box on a piece of paper saying "You got a warrant, didn't you?", there is nothing to stop a G. Gordon Liddy type from listening in on the other presidential candidate's conversations, and their planners and donors and strategists.

    This is

  • by morgauxo ( 974071 ) on Friday November 21, 2014 @05:36PM (#48437457)

    No one has been punished and they are still spying on us all. Where's the backlash? People complaining on Slashdot?

    • No one has been punished and they are still spying on us all

      That's the kicker, ain't it?

      No matter how much the citizens have protested, TPTB still REFUSES to listen

      We call ourselves a "democratic country" but are we truly democratic?

      Our government, the government of the United States of America, is behaving exactly like a tyrannical regime - in which it not only conveniently ignores the wish of the citizentry, it continues to carry out programs which are designed to undermine the validity of the democratic principles within the country

      • by AthanasiusKircher ( 1333179 ) on Friday November 21, 2014 @06:39PM (#48437895)

        We call ourselves a "democratic country" but are we truly democratic?

        Our government, the government of the United States of America, is behaving exactly like a tyrannical regime - in which it not only conveniently ignores the wish of the citizentry, it continues to carry out programs which are designed to undermine the validity of the democratic principles within the country

        Many have argued that this is the natural tendency of democracy. Plato ranked democracy as the second-worst type of government, inevitably degrading into tyranny [wikipedia.org], since the "mob" will always eventually be swayed to vote away their power by promises from some prospective tyrant who promises them something that appeals to their immediate concerns (safety, security, food, wealth, homes, land, etc.). So, the "mob" votes away their rights in exchange for something else that seems more important at the moment.

        The ancient Romans solved this problem with a special office of dictator [wikipedia.org], which was only appointed for limited times to deal with a crisis. There was a strong tradition in the Roman Republic (which held for at least a few centuries) where ambition to be a sole leader was strongly discouraged among the ruling class -- to be accused of desiring power was one of the worst sins. The topmost offices were only to be held for one short term in one's lifetime, or at least with a period of several years between, to prevent anything like a "king" or "tyrant" gaining permanent power.

        But in the late 2nd century BCE, various elements were set in motion that ultimately led to the downfall of the Republic, mostly due to populist reformers who wanted to give suffrage to more people beyond the traditional "Roman citizens," and those reformers who promised the poor and landless all sorts of things. In exchange, the poor and landless broke with Roman tradition and started electing people to offices for many consecutive terms, and when crises arose, the dictators stayed in their offices for longer and longer.

        Eventually, Julius Caesar came along and got himself declared dictator to deal with various things, but then arranged to become effectively dictator for life. (There's a lot more to the story, involving the gradual accumulation of power in central locations and people, standing armies who supported generals in lawless actions, etc.)

        Anyhow -- the founders of the U.S. tried their darnedest to keep such a degradation from happening in the republic they designed. They were terrified of the mob (as Plato had been), and they saw the mistakes of the Roman Republic. So, they only gave the vote to those who seemed to have responsibility (male landowners, effectively similar to the heads of the ancient Greek demos, the root of democratic ideas). They isolated the upper chamber from popular election in the federal government. They deplored standing armies, preferring to rely on militias when a crisis occurred. They included even more checks and balances than the Roman Republic. In case any group of people did gain control, they built in strict Constitutional limits to federal power, so even if someone had a lot of power within the federal government, most of the powers and rights would be handled by state and local governments.

        Gradually, particularly over the past 75 years or so, most of these aspects of the original governmental structure have gradually been overruled -- often in the name of "democracy" or "protecting the people" or providing aid and help to the poor through a central system.

        Is it a coincidence that this also happened around the same time that the educated class stopped reading the classics? You couldn't graduate high school in the 1800s without having a level of knowledge of Latin and Greek that would probably beat out an undergraduate classics major today. And with that knowledge of ancient languages generally came a

        • "Gradually, particularly over the past 75 years or so, most of these aspects of the original governmental structure have gradually been overruled -- often in the name of "democracy" or "protecting the people" or providing aid and help to the poor through a central system."

          Without this helping the poor capitalism would have fallen, let's be honest here. The american/Europe/English capitalist governments all had these problems because capitalism is fundamentally irrational at based reflecting the irrationali

          • Without this helping the poor capitalism would have fallen, let's be honest here.

            [Citation needed] -- I mean, seriously, let's be TRULY honest: for most of history, there have been people living under much, much, much more poorer circumstances than today. And the lower classes have been much more oppressed than today. How exactly would capitalism "have fallen" just because the poor were only slightly better off than they were for -- well, all of history -- rather than MUCH better off (as they are in modern industrial societies for the most part)?

            I fail to see what democracy has to d

          • by chihowa ( 366380 ) *

            The reality is human beings just aren't intelligent enough to form long lasting social orders because too many people have negative evolutionary characteristics they've inherited from the past. Our primate psychology is at the root of everything regardless of what collection of words and labels one flies under. The biology is still there.

            Those negative characteristics are only negative in the context of forming long lasting social orders (really only in the context of forming long lasting egalitarian social orders -- dynastic empires last longer than most of our social structures). They are extremely positive in the context of the affected individuals and in the case of avarice, they are beneficial to the affected's offspring (and their offspring, and so on). There is extreme benefit to be had from sabotaging the social order and norms.

            We h

            • "We humans are intelligent enough to form effective and equitable social structures, we just don't have the collective stomach for removing the saboteurs from our society."

              But that means you're not intelligent if you leave the saboteurs alone. Some science on reasoning, someone can tell you what is true and you won't believe them!

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

              • by chihowa ( 366380 ) *

                I'm not sure that intelligence, beyond a certain baseline, really enters into the formula for creating long lived social structures. For the individual, there is no tangible benefit to creating structures that will last more than a few generations. After a few generations, as you point out, they will require the efforts of other people to keep alive, so there is little that the originator can do to ensure that the structure survives.

                The most rational course of action for all individuals involved in a societ

          • by khallow ( 566160 )

            Without this helping the poor capitalism would have fallen, let's be honest here.

            Well, if we're going to be "honest" here, we should note that modern capitalism inherently helps the poor due to the efficiency of creating capital which requires well paid labor to operate. This feature has been more successful than the welfare state at alleviating poverty (though the two things can work together successfully as the current state of the Scandinavian countries indicates).

            because capitalism is fundamentally irrational at based reflecting the irrationality of mankind.

            Just because you assume something is "fundamentally irrational" doesn't mean it is.

            Say what you want but Lenin was correct about imperalism being the highest stage of capitalism.

            I'll say that Lenin was a real piece o

            • "Just because you assume something is "fundamentally irrational" doesn't mean it is."

              There are countless examples of capitalisms fundamental irrationality and waste in terms of natural resources. You should learn some science, I can tell you the facts and you won't believe them!

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

              • by khallow ( 566160 )
                Ok, so what does that video which has nothing to say about capitalism or economics have to do with your claim that capitalism being "fundamentally irrational"? One could with similar glibness similarly say that human math is fundamentally irrational - which would be wrong.

                There are countless examples of capitalisms fundamental irrationality and waste in terms of natural resources.

                No. Because we aren't try to do things in terms of natural resources. It isn't a goal of humanity to use as little energy, aluminum, or acres of land as possible. Since that is the case, then one can't perceive irrationality in that way si

        • by dbIII ( 701233 )

          Is it a coincidence that this also happened around the same time that the educated class stopped reading the classics?

          Maybe more because the educated class didn't get to run the place anymore and those that did get to run the place appointed their young catamites to run departments instead of people with the experience to operate effectively. I'm not sure when it happened but by the end of WWII the executive branch of the US government had the wool very effectively pulled over their eyes by Stalin despite

          • Maybe more because the educated class didn't get to run the place anymore and those that did get to run the place appointed their young catamites to run departments instead of people with the experience to operate effectively.

            I probably shouldn't respond to a post that uses a word like "catamite" so loosely... but do you really think nepotism (which might be a better term for what you're talking about) was new to the 20th century? It was not. That sort of corruption has been around a LONG time. Incompetent friends and relatives have always been a staple of the political process.

            • by dbIII ( 701233 )
              That word sorted out the people who've actually heard of the classics from those who have not even if it's a bit too extreme to apply to nearly every case.

              In rare cases it fits precisely and in others simple nepotism (as you suggest) or a wish to promote keen youths "with the right stuff" applies far better. Of course I don't think it's new or I wouldn't use such an old word, but it's rife today when you look at situations like that kid put in charge of a big chunk of NASA that took on their climate scien
            • by dbIII ( 701233 )
              An example of where it is entirely appropriate is Joseph McCarthy and his protege Schine, another Wolfowitz and his mistress who ended up being paid more than her purely theoretical boss Rice. Whether the relationship was physical or not is immaterial when the powerful are putting their special friends into positions of responsibility that that they show no signs of being fit for.
              I suspect that's led to a change between having a successful legal career or similar being the way to power to being a kid who h
        • Benjamin Franklin's speech that ended the constitutional convention is often cut short but you will like it. He basically says all democracies fall to despotism and lets end the debate because what we have is good enough for now.

          I don't have much faith that if Americans had to read some history that they are capable of learning from history enough to prevent it from repeating. Look at Vietnam and how easily Iraq happened despite a couple generations living thru that history.

          The fall of Rome probably has ma

        • Many have argued that this is the natural tendency of democracy. Plato ranked democracy as the second-worst type of government, inevitably degrading into tyranny [wikipedia.org]

          And Winston Churchill said [richardlangworth.com]:

          Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

          [emphasis added]

          So who are you going to believe? huh?

  • Snowden was only the latest whistleblower...

    There have been a half-dozen whistleblowers since 2002 regarding the extreme surveillance that this agency, and the dozens that have been formed since then, have been doing. Just Google the names, oh wait, don't do that! Anyho, Snowden, I'm sure, saw what happened to people who were actual officials in the agency. They went to jail. Personally, I think his actions showed he had no confidence in a lawful response from the US government. And that turned out to be tr

  • I LIKE the idea of the NSA spying on foreigners, but when it spies on American Citizens--without warrants--it becomes a vile and despicable organization that can and should be fully defunded.

    • As someone who cares about freedom and privacy, I don't support mass surveillance of any form, regardless of whether it's used against foreigners or not. I just think that we should have standards before we're allowed to spy on someone.

    • It never spied on Americans, any more so that your phone company does for having records of who called who. The information would be used to find out who a criminal was talking to. Despite what the "news" might have reported, the NSA does not listen to everyone's phone conversations.
  • So do those posters here calling Snowden a "traitor" now get how the only way he could get the message out to the people he worked for - the American people - was to tell it to the press?
    Internal complaints just got buried.
    • I don't call him a traitor for leaking this instance of the metadata. I call him a traitor for abusing his position as a system administrator to download as much intelligence as possible and then releasing it with the sole intent to damage the US. How can ANYONE claim that isn't treason.
      • by dbIII ( 701233 )
        Was his sole intent to damage the US or was it to damage those who are abusing their position?
        Absolute right of Kings went out with King John. The NSA are not the US, only part of it, and should not have unquestionable power.
  • As usual, the Democrats and the President are NOT part of the Washington establishment (that is to blame for this) and so this can't be blamed on them. They have campaigned against this (even last week). You should probably look to the Republicans to blame.

  • "An anonymous reader sends this report from the Associated Press..."

    "A reader who thinks he's anonymous sends this report from the Associated Press..."

    There...fixed that for you. ;-)

  • "Dissenters within the National Security Agency .. warned in 2009 that the program to secretly collect American phone records wasn't providing enough intelligence to justify the backlash it would cause .. after an internal debate that has not been previously reported, NSA leaders, White House officials and key lawmakers opted to continue the collection and storage of American calling records" ..

    Retrospective ass covering by the management at NSA. What were the names of these top NSA officials. What was t
  • I mean every cell phone, I don't care it it's 1G, 2G, 3G or 4G connects to a tower that then forwards to what is called an MTSO. And an MTSO is nothing but a Lucent #5ESS/2000 or Nortel DMS series switch, same as in the PSTN. So are you telling me the NSA gave all the MTSOs a pass? That's really odd.

If you aren't rich you should always look useful. -- Louis-Ferdinand Celine

Working...