Admiral Grace Hopper's Landmark Lecture Is Found, But the NSA Won't Release It (muckrock.com) 68
MuckRock is a U.S.-based 501(c)(3) non-profit collaborative news site to "request, analyze and share government documents," according to its web site.
And long-time Slashdot reader schwit1 shared their report about a lecture by Admiral Grace Hopper: In a vault at the National Security Agency lies a historical treasure: two AMPEX 1-inch open reel tapes containing a landmark lecture by Admiral Grace Hopper, a giant in the field of computer science. Titled 'Future Possibilities: Data, Hardware, Software, and People,' this lecture, recorded on August 19, 1982, at the NSA's Fort Meade headquarters, and stored in the video archives of the National Cryptographic School, offers a rare glimpse into the mind of a pioneer who shaped the very fabric of technology. Yet this invaluable artifact remains inaccessible, trapped in an obsolete format that the NSA will not release, stating that the agency is unable to play it back.
"NSA is not required to find or obtain new technology (outdated or current) in order to process a request," states the official response from the agency. But MuckRock adds that on June 25, "responding to a follow-up request, the NSA at least provided an image of the tape labels," leading MuckRock to complain that the NSA "is well-positioned to locate, borrow and use a working VTR machine to access Admiral Hopper's lectures... The NSA, with its history of navigating complex technological landscapes and decrypting matters of national significance, does not typically shy away from a challenge." The challenge of accessing these recordings is not just technical, but touches on broader issues around preserving technological heritage.... It is our shared obligation to safeguard such pivotal elements of our nationâ(TM)s history, ensuring they remain within reach of future generations. While the stewardship of these recordings may extend beyond the NSAâ(TM)s typical purview, they are undeniably a part of Americaâ(TM)s national heritage.
And long-time Slashdot reader schwit1 shared their report about a lecture by Admiral Grace Hopper: In a vault at the National Security Agency lies a historical treasure: two AMPEX 1-inch open reel tapes containing a landmark lecture by Admiral Grace Hopper, a giant in the field of computer science. Titled 'Future Possibilities: Data, Hardware, Software, and People,' this lecture, recorded on August 19, 1982, at the NSA's Fort Meade headquarters, and stored in the video archives of the National Cryptographic School, offers a rare glimpse into the mind of a pioneer who shaped the very fabric of technology. Yet this invaluable artifact remains inaccessible, trapped in an obsolete format that the NSA will not release, stating that the agency is unable to play it back.
"NSA is not required to find or obtain new technology (outdated or current) in order to process a request," states the official response from the agency. But MuckRock adds that on June 25, "responding to a follow-up request, the NSA at least provided an image of the tape labels," leading MuckRock to complain that the NSA "is well-positioned to locate, borrow and use a working VTR machine to access Admiral Hopper's lectures... The NSA, with its history of navigating complex technological landscapes and decrypting matters of national significance, does not typically shy away from a challenge." The challenge of accessing these recordings is not just technical, but touches on broader issues around preserving technological heritage.... It is our shared obligation to safeguard such pivotal elements of our nationâ(TM)s history, ensuring they remain within reach of future generations. While the stewardship of these recordings may extend beyond the NSAâ(TM)s typical purview, they are undeniably a part of Americaâ(TM)s national heritage.
Re: Da fuq? Is the NSA telling us that... (Score:3)
They have no obligation.
That's it; they simply aren't required to take any action and are refusing to be compelled.
Re: (Score:2)
They have no obligation.
That's it; they simply aren't required to take any action and are refusing to be compelled.
It is still a government agency, and like all the rest they want to do as little work as they possibly can.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the NSA. It's their job to tell you as little as they possibly can.
The NSA probably keeps a lot of old stuff on obsolete media so they can make use of this particular loophole.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the NSA. It's their job to tell you as little as they possibly can.
Could stop paying them and nobody would ever know.
Re: (Score:3)
That is actually not their job, not in their charter nor in their annual mission statements. They were formed by the National Security Act of 1947. Hiding their activity from judicial or legislative overview is *not* in either that law nor in their mission statements. The mission statements announce their *adherence* to law, a compliance with legal limitations which they have been explicitly and implicitly ignoring with impunity since their foundation.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, they are adhering to law. To the letter. Probably if you look hard enough you'd find that they had something to do with that particular part of that particular law.
The thing about spying is that stuff you find out is far less useful if the other guy knows that you know. Especially signals intelligence. Whether their (public) charter says so or not, it is absolutely the NSAs job to protect secrets.
Also, keep in mind that you are not permitted to know all the law. In fact, at least some of the l
Re: (Score:3)
They have a legally compelling obligation, called the Freedom of Information Act.
It's difficult to assess whether such information is sensitive or new or needs to be an exception to this law without being able to review the information. Given the NSA's demonstrated history of criminal and abusive behavior under the guise of national security, they should not be trusted to make such decisions themselves.
Re: (Score:3)
You should try reading the details of that act or the specific agency implementations before you try and make an authoritative comment about it. There are provisions that speak to the level of effort required to retrieve information and even how much they can charge a requester to do so. Yes, they will charge you the cost to retrieve the information.
The NSA didn't object to releasing the material based on the sensitivity of the information, they refused based on the fact that they don't have the current a
Re: (Score:2)
How would you know the reason for the refusal, since the NSA has been lying about FOIA requests since its foundation?
Re:Da fuq? Is the NSA telling us that... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
There were 3 different standards for 1" helical scan video tapes, Type A, B, and C. I think IVC also had their own format. The reel doesn't say which the tape is.
Wish I had Mod points --> "+1 Interesting"
Re: (Score:2)
There were 3 different standards for 1" helical scan video tapes, Type A, B, and C. I think IVC also had their own format. The reel doesn't say which the tape is.
For 1982 I would assume C-Format, though you never can tell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
A possible reason for the "no" is that without review they cannot confirm that it does not contain classified materials. There are two avenues of hope - 1. They send it to NARA, 2. someone in congressional affairs is contacted, AND a NSA cleared contractor gets a 1$ contract (e.g. a non-donation donation) to recover it.
Note: I have neither read all the comments, nor the article.
Re:Easy solution. (Score:5, Funny)
Controlling history. (Score:2, Insightful)
And there we have it.
A faction in our government is trying to modify how history is portrayed.
And they're the only gateway to the information that pertains to US ALL!
Re:Controlling history. (Score:4, Informative)
It's not just that.
This is the NSA's way of telling people to fuck off. They won't be told what to do. Period.
Schroedinger's Data (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I've had data like that. Ancient mag tapes in particular were vulnerable. A previous employer had it on my task list to occasionally transfer data to new media, and especially to transfer it to at least two technologies to ensure some widespread failure mode did not destroy critical data.
Lie or Gap? (Score:3)
So you're saying that if I want to transmit data in a way that the NSA can't read, all I have to do is procure a vintage tape machine and send tapes back and forth? Either that or they're lying.
Re:Lie or Gap? (Score:5, Informative)
Fine. (Score:5, Insightful)
So you aren't required to go get the technology required to read the media in order to fulfill the Freedom of Information Act request. Fine.
Give the Ampex tapes to the Smithsonian, where they probably should be anyway. I'm sure their archivists have the tech necessary already.
Stop being obstructive asshats, and do history a solid here. Fucking NSA.
Less paperwork necessary to disregard the request? (Score:5, Interesting)
The "media" excuse may simply be bureaucratically simpler than making "security classification" excuses. Less paperwork necessary to disregard the request?
Re: Fine. (Score:5, Interesting)
They can't hand it over until it's reviewed for potentially sensitive information.
It's part of their required process.
Re: (Score:2)
They can't hand it over until it's reviewed for potentially sensitive information.
It's part of their required process.
The lectures are an hour and a half long in total. Should take no more than a year and a half at government speed.
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe they really are that incompetent, who knows for sure?
Re:Fine. (Score:5, Insightful)
They're a security agency. They're hardwired to deny any access request they can.
"Do we have legally valid excuse to deny this request?"
"Yes."
"Reject it, then."
You don't understand. I'll explain (Score:5, Interesting)
First, they'd have to overcome the technology to make the audio usable in a modern sense. That's the easy part. Then they'd have to transcribe the audio. Then they'd have to get SMEs on various classification guides to figure out if any of this is classified or derivatively classified. Then you'd get a redacted version of that transcript.
This is not something they can just hand over to the Smithsonian, even if it is from 1982. Someone is trying to save some money on budget by denying this, but there it is. You aren't going to get around this process. Maybe someone can put a funding earmark into next year's budget.
Re: You don't understand. I'll explain (Score:3)
I for one actually think their proffered reason is the real one, kind of. You can request videos which they have in a readily available format, and they will redact and provide those. Not always without some persistence, though.
In this case, they don't have in place a regular means (discovered by the employees via minimum effort) to view those tapes. I don't expect it to be a huge hurdle for the NSA, but it's a legally sufficient hurdle. And yes, that sucks.
I would point out that they actually volunteered s
Re: (Score:1)
not Smithsonian, NARA. NARA is capable of receiving classified materials. They have a responsibility of protecting records of the republic for the life of the republic. this clearly is a very important record.
send them one (Score:2)
I suppose MuckRock could provide and send the equipment to the NSA. Maybe a little cooperation would help things along.
So just plug in equipment sent by random people? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, sure, old school reel-to-reel tape recorders are known for their malware delivery capabilities.
I'm sure they would drag the thing into the most sensitive areas and use it there too. Makes perfect sense.
Radio transmitters without active electronics (Score:3)
Ok, sure, old school reel-to-reel tape recorders are known for their malware delivery capabilities.
We are not talking about its original factory configuration, hence "to make sure it was not hacked". Do you imagine adding a wifi or bluetooth device overly complicated? Hell, radio transmitters have been made without power supplies or active electronics:
"The Thing, also known as the Great Seal bug, was one of the first covert listening devices (or "bugs") to use passive techniques to transmit an audio signal. It was concealed inside a gift given by the Soviet Union to W. Averell Harriman, the United Sta
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Its been more than 25 years. Classification is not the issue, the content was not even reviewed and that is the issue.
No reason the tapes cannot be taken to a information safe location where an AMPEX recorder can play them back and something more modern can capture it. All this requires is cooperation.
I'll bet the Library of Congress could deal with the tapes. Review them there. This isn't about security, its about resources that are mostly time related.
Re: (Score:2)
The NSA would be likely to do so: a chance to transmit from hardware guaranteed to handle sensitive data would be invaluable. And with modern tools like wifi and power-line data transmission, securing it could require dismantling some old equipment without manuals or parts lists.
The NSA and Secret Service have, themselves, installed backdoors in commercial equipment. They should appreciate the irony facing consumers who need secure equipment.
NSA can be directed to release it. (Score:2)
You'll need to make it a Big Deal but the NSA can be directed to release them. The NSA can say "no" and then Biden can say, "LOL release the tapes dickwads."
They still work for the public. Call your reps and have them remind them. Unless of course you are in a Confederate state then best to simply shoot your reps.
---
Attention all other countries (Score:3)
Please convert all of your video transmissions to AMPEX-1 format, the NSA can't read them...
Again, I think they need a boot to the head.
Re: (Score:3)
No, it's not that they can't read them. It's that they won't put any effort into trying.
That's likely Type C or IVC 9000 (Score:3)
Type C is somewhat more likely, given that time period, and those machines are quite common, there were literally tens of thousands of those churned out of factories in Japan and other countries.
If it's IVC 9000, the other commonly used 1 inch format in the US, they still can be found, there are rumors about 10 of them being in Czechia, and almost 70 of those have been built.
In theory it could be something like Type B which is rarer than Type C, but mostly used in Europe.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but the rubber and plastic parts deteriorate over time, even if you aren't using them. So there may not be any workable ones. (Also some of the lubricants get gummy.)
If someone's been using and maintaining them, I'm sure they're workable...but if they've just been sitting in a storage closet, probably not.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but the rubber and plastic parts deteriorate over time, even if you aren't using them. So there may not be any workable ones. (Also some of the lubricants get gummy.)
If someone's been using and maintaining them, I'm sure they're workable...but if they've just been sitting in a storage closet, probably not.
There are plenty of working 1" machines around. Every major label has several, as they still have huge archives of reels they haven't processed into digital yet. There are still a lot of people who record all-analog who use them as well.
Nevermind (Score:2)
I didn't catch that these are 1" video reels.
Re: (Score:2)
I would say that many Type C recorders are still in service for archival work. They were mostly bought by people who have seen a lot of rubber debacles in the past, so they make sure to have spares, plus they were made for service lives of decades.
And plastic.... well we are not talking about lightweight and fiddly consumer grade VCRs like U-Matic, this is heavy duty professional stuff.
AMPEX (Score:3)
The problem isn't going to be finding a player. There are plenty floating around out there. The problem is that it's AMPEX. Their 4 series were a very popular and high quality tape at the time, probably the best you could get, but the glue they used for backing inevitably fails and the tape falls apart when playing. You can bake the tape at low temperature for a few hours and probably get decent audio out of it, but if it was stored in poor conditions, it might be gone.
There are Scotch and Sony tapes from t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that's a good point, degradation of the physical medium, does happen, but it's dependent on the formulations used to manufacture the tape. I guess you wouldn't know until you tried. Lots of cassette tapes from the 70's are still playable though.... but I admit it's been some 20 years since I played any of mine back :-)
I was wrong, I thought they were audio tapes, but they are 1" video tapes. Still, AMPEX specifically, and in that era in particular, are known for extremely high failure rates for their tape. As in nearly 100%. I wouldn't imagine their video tape would be radically a radically different formulation than their high-end audio tapes, which also had problems.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
You can bake the tape at low temperature for a few hours and probably get decent audio out of it, but if it was stored in poor conditions, it might be gone.
Waiting longer won't likely make it better.
This is only a bereucratic problem. (Score:5, Interesting)
The 1" reel to reel video tape format was widely used in the 1970s and early 80s for broadcast and editing purposes. We had an editing setup that used it at a college PBS television station as late as the early 1990s (it was very obsolete by then, the station was using older technology for lack of funding, but it worked just fine.)
Various post houses specialize in obsolete formats and there should be some 1" machines still in service here in the United States.
As others have said, government agencies have no incentive to go out of their way, they are by design monopolies and thus have no competition and no incentive to compete. This doesn't mean they are all bad, but it takes good people within those agencies to step up and make things happen. If the culture of mediocrity is completely pervasive, then you get endless roadblocks. It's easier to do nothing when there is no incentive to do something. If the chorus becomes loud enough and they are pressured from above, they will budge. Don't stop pestering them and get as many people as you can to continue to pester them. It will happen eventually.
Re: (Score:3)
Heck, I have two C format machines at my house. One Sony BVH-2500 and one Sony BVH-3000 (the one with the air-blown loading system). Lots of hours on the heads, but they work (sample: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]).
don't need 1 inch deck (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
However, you could easily pick up a 2 inch deck, for example a 24 track tascam from eBay for a few grand and play it back on that. The one inch tape would cover 12 tape heads and you would for certain be able to make a copy. Not saying it would be the best copy you could make, which obviously would be from playback on the original source equipment, but the idea that the tape could not be played back and the information is lost is false.
That can work for audio - Frank Zappa did this to archive 1" 12-track tapes - but in this case, it's probably a C-Format helical scan videotape. You would need an Ampex VPR or Sony BVH machine to play it back.
Re: (Score:2)
+1 for a Zappa mention!
Is editordavid new here? He claims to be an editor (Score:2)
nationâ(TM)s history, ensuring they remain within reach of future generations. While the stewardship of these recordings may extend beyond the NSAâ(TM)s typical purview, they are undeniably a part of Americaâ(TM)s
...the limitations of this antique site's text capabilities are not exactly news to us. They're not exactly even olds to us. They're more like Devonian or Silurian to us, although it's perfectly simple to adjust to the age when your tires were rocks and your engines were bare feet.
You might think that an "editor" might be aware of this but, this isn't news, it's not even Fark, it's a depressingly antiquated tech site with "editors" that work for the occasional Cheezy-Poof and were hired on that basis.
National Archives (Score:5, Interesting)
The National Archives has the equipment and is cleared to handle classified material.
But that would require the government to work well together for the benefit of the People.
We should probably just shut up and give them our money.
Re: (Score:2)
All this bitching and moaning about "the government" when almost all of the fraud, waste, and abuse comes from public-private partnerships.
Isn't this a universal excuse? (Score:2)
"[whichever agency] is not required to find or obtain new technology (outdated or current) in order to process a request" either due to non-existence of technology, incompetence, laziness, apathy, or opposition is an excuse that can be applied to any information request about any type of information. If this excuse is legally allowed, all information request laws are effectively neutered.
It's the money, stupid (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem is FOIA requests are basically done at minimum effort at a nominal cost. It costs money to handle them and the NSA has basically said the FOIA request doesn't have enough money to do it.
I mean, the process to do it all is probably extensive given the records, and likely any machine used would never be able to leave NSA property in case classified material was on it. Given the potential degradation of the tape, it might leave oxide flakes on it which might cause classified information to be left on the machine.
The only real way is if someone can get the NSA the necessary funding to fund the project of acquiring a suitable player, recovery of the recording and digitizing it, transcribing the contents to electronic form, submissions to redacting the classified content, and then making it available to the public.
The machines are probably trivially easy to obtain as there are probably loads on eBay. The digitizing and repairing the recording will probably take a while due to degradation of the media. Then you need someone to transcribe it, and then redact it. And it'll all be someone's time and money. Given the people at the NSA are well compensated, you're probably looking north of a million dollars to do the project, most of which is probably paying the salaries of NSA employees to do that work instead of their normal job.
And the problem is, I'm sure no one has a spare million dollars in their budget to spend on this, and I'm sure taxpayers would balk at paying for this. YOu can probably ask the NSA for a quote of doing what is necessary to release the records in order to fulfill the FOIA request. They probably figure the cost is just too high that no one will be able to afford it, so better to just reject it than say a high price. But I'm sure if you ask nicely and make it happen, it'll be possible.
The NSA has a bunch of geeks, and they are probably wanting to do it - off hours if they could, but I'm sure it's the rules that are going to enforce they do it by the books to avoid inadvertent data leaks.
It's actually going to be a lot of work. (Score:2)
Don't attribute to malice what should be attributed to incompetence.
The sad fact is any tape based material is now susceptible to "tape shedding" and is likely beyond the NSA to provide proper archival services.
It's not going to be an easy task to carefully extract the video off the tapes. Nor will it be quick or cheap.
This simply is not going to be a small project.
Be thankful that maybe they don't have the machine to play them. Otherwise some "kid" could plop them on the machine and destroy the tapes witho
The NSA (Score:2)
The only agency in the government that actually listens to you.