First Confirmed Prism Surveillance Target Was Democracy Activist (fortune.com) 110
A new report by Television New Zealand in collaboration with The Intercept, based on leaks of former U.S. National Security Agency worker Edward Snowden has for the first time named a target of the NSA's controversial Prism program. The target was a middle-aged civil servant and pro-democracy activist named Tony Fullman. Fullman, who is originally from Fiji but has lived in New Zealand for decades, is an advocate for democracy in Fiji and a critic of Fijian prime minister Frank Bainimarama, who took power in a 2006 coup. From a Fortune report: According to The Intercept, the NSA in 2012 monitored Fullman's communications through the Prism program and passed on information to the New Zealand intelligence services. Around the same time, the New Zealand authorities raided Fullman's home and revoked his passport. The New Zealand intelligence services were not themselves allowed to spy on Fullman, who was a New Zealand citizen. However, as Snowden has repeatedly described, the agencies of many Anglophone countries spy on each other's behalf, in order to bypass their national legal restrictions. Fullman suggested in the article that people in the group may well have said violent things about Bainimarama, but this was just venting, not a plot. According to the report, they never suspected someone was listening into their communications. The NSA was said to be helping by analyzing Fullman's Facebook and Gmail activities. The 190 pages of intercepted documentation seen by The Intercept apparently didn't reveal evidence of a plot.
Encryption (Score:5, Insightful)
And this is exactly why the general public needs encryption and why various TLA outfits and buddies like to use the "think of the children" garbage to denounce it.
Re: (Score:1)
The issue with that logic is that if government agencies can get around laws restricting them from spying on you without consequence then what makes you think the average person can rely on easily available encryption to protect them?
Re:Encryption (Score:5, Informative)
Encryption relies on trust (Score:4, Insightful)
if government agencies can get around laws restricting them from spying on you without consequence then what makes you think the average person can rely on easily available encryption to protect them?
Getting around math is not like getting around a law. That's the short answer to that point.
Unless people are mathematicians themselves, they are unable to personally verify the effectiveness of an encryption algorithm. When you use an encryption algorithm, you have to trust it works without a secret decryption algorithm.
Re: (Score:1)
This "everybody can code" momentum needs to be diverted to a self-defense atmosphere. Even if your cipher is a piece of crap that can be cracked with basic cryptoanalysis techniques, it would be an interesting turn for endless homebrew encryption and subterfuge networks to begin quagmiring these ineffective surveillance networks even further.
Re: (Score:2)
it would be an interesting turn for endless homebrew encryption and subterfuge networks to begin quagmiring these ineffective surveillance networks even further.
Zl rapelcgvba vf orggre guna lbhe rapelcgvba!
Re: (Score:1)
Yea lets toss all of our top mathematicians in jail. Splendid idea.
Do you think they care?
It's not like the North Korean government has done what is best for the nation, but the ruling class doesn't really suffer from that.
And if you execute a couple of mathematicians that doesn't cooperate then the rest are more likely to fall in line and do as they are told.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
The burden of proof lies with the prosecution which cannot prove any laws were broken without decrypting the file.
Well, yeah, that is not how it works.
If they think you are guilty then you are guilty and kept in custody until proof have been provided to you "commit suicide".
Re: (Score:2)
Getting around math is not like getting around a law. That's the short answer to that point.
When security is breached, it's almost never the mathematics that was broken.
Re: (Score:1)
Encryption is of no use if you are targeted. Encryption is only viable against blanket disregard of the peoples (plural) right to their property, their conversations and their communications. It will not help an individual target. Brute force will break any encryption.
Re:Encryption (Score:4, Informative)
Brute force will break any encryption.
Not true [wikipedia.org]. Some encryption simply cannot be broken. However it is a major pain to set up, and you have to trust the parties on either end completely to not copy the pad and to destroy the pad once it has been used. Failing that, however, it cannot be broken.
Re: Encryption (Score:1)
Brute force against YOU will break ANY encryption. I think after the second broken finger (they'll break the first one to make you understand that they're not messing about) you will come to understand their "reasons".
Re: Encryption (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
One time pads are very easy to break. Much more difficult to verify though. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Torture is useless when you create a person who fabricates anything to get you to stop. They will confess to everything, and admit everything, which is absolutely useless because you're left with the doubts of your suspicions being confirmed because they're true, or because the person made it up.
That is true, and it's often shortened to "torture doesn't work". But that's not entirely true either. There are (unfortunately) specific circumstances when torture works. In situations where you can easily and quickly verify the information you get from the subject, but not get it any other way, and you have the torture subject "on-line", i.e. can "turn up the heat" if the information is incorrect, torture works only too well.
These situations aren't that common if you're a state trying to root out dissiden
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Encryption (Score:5, Interesting)
That's incorrect. There is always, going back many thousands of years, a struggle between the "smarter mouse and better mouse trap". That's how it is.
Do you honestly think that some laws on paper will stop TLA agencies from doing things they shouldn't? They already violate laws and "get around" them.. H*ll, that's called out right in the summary.
Re: (Score:2)
How is encryption really going to stop the TLAs from scanning what you post on FaceBook?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And this is exactly why the general public needs encryption and why various TLA outfits and buddies like to use the "think of the children" garbage to denounce it.
Rubbish. If you've nothing to hide... you aren't a protestor... you keep your head down... do what the government tells you... aren't unlucky enough to get caught in a wide sweeping dragnet... then you have no need for encryption or privacy!
Re: (Score:2)
And this is exactly why the general public needs encryption and why various TLA outfits and buddies like to use the "think of the children" garbage to denounce it.
Rubbish. If you've nothing to hide... you aren't a protestor... you keep your head down... do what the government tells you... aren't unlucky enough to get caught in a wide sweeping dragnet... then you have no need for encryption or privacy!
In that case, please turn over your Nobel-prize winning idea to anyone who asks for it. And turn over your entire customer list to your competition. And give me your SSN (or state ID.) And give me the code to your million-dollar app.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
suspected the poor chap of a serious crime.
He might have made a sarcastic remark involving his opponent and the second amendment.
Re: (Score:2)
Since it's impossible to tell pretended cluelessness from real cluelessness on /., it's often hard to tell.
Re: (Score:2)
Since it's impossible to tell pretended cluelessness
I tried appending the emoji for snark. But Slashdot doesn't support that character set.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, yes. Apparently he was known to have made remarks about inciting a coup, so he was put under surveillance, found to not be a threat to US interests, and the surveillance was stopped.
In other words, due process worked just fine.
Re:Suspected of a Crime (Score:5, Insightful)
Simple. He is an activist that promotes Democracy. He believes in things like freedom, liberty and in the rights of the individual.
What could be a bigger crime in the west today than promoting Democracy?
Re: (Score:1)
Simple. He is an activist that promotes Democracy. He believes in things like freedom, liberty and in the rights of the individual.
What could be a bigger crime in the west today than promoting Democracy?
It's not a crime in the US. But it may be in other countries.
Re: (Score:1)
So here's where the BS comes in:
1). He was "suspected of advocating violence". Based on what evidence? Where was the probable cause? Without probably cause this surveillance is illegal;
2). He is a democracy advocate, speaking against a military dictatorship. I'm looking for a problem here... there doesn't seem to be one;
3). The NSA is spying on a New Zealand citizen based on a theoretical set of charges actionable in Fiji. Yeah, there seems to be a huge jurisdictional problem here;
4). Does all this
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Thoughtcrime
Politics as usual (Score:5, Informative)
You might wonder why a pro-democracy country is spying on a pro-democracy campaigner. It's not because of any 'terrorist' BS, that's just the excuse. They monitored him, so that when they negotiate with Fiji in future, they can offer him up as a bargaining chip.
From the article: "Fullman reckons the timing of the raids was connected with the New Zealand foreign minister’s visit to Fiji for trade talks, just days later."
And this is why NSA and GCHQ spying on their own countrymen's communications is a bad thing (it is NOT harmless). Because the data they capture is used in political deals against the rights of the target and against the interests of the country as a whole.
New Zealand would have pulled his passport to secure a trade deal if necessary, so that they could tout a trade deal as a political win. All hidden from legal and democratic observation by the veil of 'security'.
Re: (Score:1)
Many "Pro-Democracy" people have an agenda that is outside the mainstream, however blame the fact that their crazy ideas are not in play, is because the system isn't allowing the "Silent Majority" to vote for it.
There is also a risk to governments in a more Democratic system, as the general mass can be volatile to the fads of the time. Which is why the United States has a Democratic Republic design, vs a straight Democracy. It slows the system down as to prevent crazy ideas of the time to ruen a long term
Re: (Score:3)
You might wonder why a pro-democracy country is spying on a pro-democracy campaigner.
Perhaps they have different definitions of democracy? There's also a lot of people who FUCKIN' LOVE DEMOCRACY until their side loses.
One would need to examine the guy's actual politics before clutching pearls about targeting a "pro-democracy" activist as described by The Guardian.
Re: (Score:2)
If one is not too lazy to google, one discovers that Fiji was under a military goverment (rather than a democratically elected one) in 2012. Fullman is implicated in a number of rather unsavory acts, but it's difficult to determine if he really was associated with violence in support of restoring democratic governance or if that's just the dictatorship trying to
Re: (Score:1)
oh good, another the 'ends justify the means' argument.
' I shot every third person because. and LUCKLY I hit a real criminal' fits this argument too,
just sayin'.
Fantastic... (Score:5, Funny)
Was the NSA trying to protect the TSA from dehydration by ensuring that American air travelers would continue to have that Fiji bottled water to confiscate?
Re:Fantastic... (Score:4, Insightful)
>helping protect Fiji's military government from possible plots
Rather odd that NZ would do that, considering that both NZ and Australia called Bainimarama a dictator and imposed sanctions against Fiji for years. But he got elected PM in 2014, so it's all cool now.
It can be pretty embarrassing politically for a government to have a plot to kill a foreign head of state hatched on their soil, so if they thought he was a possible threat it was in their interest to monitor him. You can also take the recent "coup" attempt in Turkey as another reason: it can help provide evidence for/against another state's claim that an expat dissident might have masterminded failed, poorly executed coup that is now being used as an excuse to purge other dissenting individuals and entities
Re: (Score:3)
A coup is only a good thing if the guys you like win and you're in a position to take advantage of the situation.
Otherwise, involuntary changes of government are a huge source of instability.
Re: (Score:2)
involuntary changes of government are a huge source of instability.
Ya don't say.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lack of such evidence looks bad for the US government, and could be taken as proof they supported the coup attempt.
Actually, in my opinion the fact that the US hasn't released evidence or turned Gulen over to Turkey even in the face of increasing gravitation towards Russia on the part of Erdogan lends credence to the fact that Gulen was not involved in any way with the coup. They can't release what they don't have. Personally, as small and as uncoordinated as the coup was it stank of a maskirovka pretty quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm surprised that the New Zealand government would even *care* about a Fijian expat's rants about Frank "Bananarama" Bainimarama or his banana republic dictatorship. Hell, it was Australia that sent special forces in to quell the natives after the 2000 coup. What exactly is New Zealand interested in? It can't be lucrative trade given Fiji's tiny economy, and it's not like a tidal wave of refugees is going to cross 1,000 miles of open ocean.
Fiji is a typical colonial shit show, with non-indigenous Indian
How is this not illegal? (Score:2, Informative)
It's illegal for most countries to spy on their own citizens, but it's not illegal to share spy data with allies and have them give you the information on your own citizens that your own laws preclude?
This is a violation of the spirit if not the letter of the law. Acquiring such information from allies should be just as illegal as spying on your country's own citizens, full stop.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Where is a +1 Inciteful mod when you need it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What GP describes started in WWII. It was formalized (between the US, UK and Australia) just after the war and isn't news to anyone who has been paying attention.
What are you going do do, dig up FDR and put him in prison?
Re: (Score:1)
scratch my back and I'll scratch yours (Score:4, Informative)
Scratch my back and I'll scratch yours:
You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.
Fig. You do a favor for me and I'll do a favor for you.; If you do something for me that I cannot do for myself, I will do something for you that you cannot do for yourself. I'll grab the box on the top shelf if you will creep under the table and pick up my pen. You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours.
http://idioms.thefreedictionar... [thefreedictionary.com]
Re: (Score:2)
New Zealand is part of FIVEEYES. If they are anything like the UK, their signals intelligence security services are basically a subsidiary of the NSA.
More interesting is if this was sanctioned in New Zealand, and if so who signed off on it and if they will be investigated now.
his name is Harry Buttle! (Score:2)
Oh, yeah, you can trust us, we'll never abuse this surveillance power.
If they have the capability, they're gonna use it. Most likely to stalk their ex-girlfriends and harass those that buck they system. It's just human nature.
Proof. (Score:1)
He didn't do nothing wrong, so he hads nothing to hide.
Re:Proof. (Score:4, Informative)
Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
If one gives me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something there to hang him.
—Cardinal Richelieu
Re:Richelieu (Score:1)
Cheaters... (Score:2, Insightful)
...in our own government.
However, as Snowden has repeatedly described, the agencies of many Anglophone countries spy on each other's behalf, in order to bypass their national legal restrictions
I am not surprised, but I am very, very disappointed. We have let the terrorists win because we have let them cow us into abandoning any sense of justice and liberty for some bullshit illusion of security. I now fear my own government far more than I fear "teh terrorists". That, or in a more cynical view, the
Re: (Score:1)
Democracy? (Score:2)
Eww. Next they'll want to introduce freedom and justice for all. Note the slippery slope, people!
Glad they nipped it in the bud.
Aga blah blah (Score:2)
Keeping the world safe for democracy! (Score:2)
The US gubmint - keeping the world safe for democracy! Or not...
Re: (Score:1)
WERE (Score:2)
"The New Zealand intelligence services were not themselves allowed to spy on Fullman, who was a New Zealand citizen"
When this stuff started coming out, the prime minister of New Zealand rammed through legislation making it retroactively legal for the intelligence services to spy on citizens - mainly because they were caught redhanded directly doing so without even bothering to go through the PRISM facade.
(Disclosure: I'm from NZ but haven't lived there for nearly 20 years as I was becoming more and more unh
Re: (Score:2)
This. 'Democracy' in Fiji has historically been tinged with racial supremacy. Bainimarama is a boon to the nation - an ethnic Fijian who looked past the interests of his race, to the interest of his country and all its people.
"Fullman suggested in the article that people in the group may well have said violent things about Bainimarama,"
Yes, much the same way Islamic fundamentalists may well say violent things about infidels. How is monitoring these guys wrong? Because they're culturally 'Christian', and the