Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 245 posts

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#171

Post by hackinthebochs »

hammock wrote: post #49
fixermark wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does the information you're describing (IP addresses used, ties to Russia, malware shape) help the average American if disclosed publicly? Because the harm seems immediate: bad actors will change their tactics and burn their channels, making them harder to detect, trace, or understand. Given that the average American barely understands what a computer virus is, is the level of technical detail you're calling for…

It helps Americans by bringing them more truthful journalism, by allowing the reporters to report independently verified facts rather than hearsay

Does the term "net gain" mean anything to you?

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#172

Post by throwaway-1209 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #118
throwaway-1209 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be unbelievably stupid. It's not like in DOJ anyone cares if she "did the right thing", they'll put her in the slammer all the same. Not even Hillary Clinton would get off scot free after something like this.

> That would be unbelievably stupid. It's not like in DOJ anyone cares if she "did the right thing" A jury (with nullification power), in principal, might (as might the electorate who choose Presidents who have pardon and clemency power); if you aren't going to flee to avoid capture and aren't confident of your ability to evade the counterintelligence services in the long term, compromising your ability in the short…

You sound like someone who's never been on a jury. Jury gets very exact instructions from the judge before it makes a decision. In these instructions judge interprets the law in a way that the jury will understand. She doesn't tell them how to vote, but in a clear cut case like this one someone who has been selected for impartiality will almost certainly make an accusatory decision. Jury is not a get out of jail free card.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#173

Post by grandalf »

hsod wrote: post #121
throwaway-1209 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a statement. Statements are not evidence. I can make it seem like it's GRU (or "the Chinese") from right where I am in the US, with no way for anyone to say it ain't so. And I'm not even a pro.

What would constitute evidence in this context? To me, this statement which was: * made contemporaneously with the investigation * by experts * not intended for public consumption is evidence. It's not a formal proof, but it's evidence.

> by experts

Experts in what? Security research or PR?

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#174

Post by cylinder »

cproctor wrote: post #96

I wonder whether NSA uses syntactic watermarking[1], imperceptible changes to word order or sentence form, keyed to the user accessing a document. This, or other techniques of embedding a fingerprint in the text itself, would allow a leaker to be identified from just a transcription of the document. What is the right amount of fuzzing for a news organization to perform on leaked documents, to protect a source while p…

How would changes to word order or sentence form be imperceptible?

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#175

Post by grandalf »

mladenkovacevic wrote: post #162
hsod wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would constitute evidence in this context? To me, this statement which was: * made contemporaneously with the investigation * by experts * not intended for public consumption is evidence. It's not a formal proof, but it's evidence.

If somebody leaked internal FSB analysis docs claiming but offering no raw intelligence that Ukrainian government is full of US spies and Euromaidan was financed by Soros, would any mainstream media outlet take this kind of source as "evidence"?

It's embarrassing how much some people seem to forget about rationality and skepticism when thinking about this issue.

The leaked info contains a few more specifics about the hand waving from a few months ago, but no actual evidence. What's worse is how the wording of the leaked document and press coverage (including that of The Intercept) interleaves simple assertions of fact into the narrative which do not support claims made by the narrative but simply make the whole thing seem "fact-based" even if it's speculative.

Generally speaking, The Intercept publishes very high quality work, but the presence of Sam Biddle's name on the byline is generally a good indicator of low quality work.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#176

Post by m-j-fox »

Shivetya wrote: post #153
throwaway-1209 wrote: post #24

Nah. Only 6 people have printed the doc and of those only one could be found in phone call metadata making a call to a press related contact. I don't know what the leaker was thinking. And in the end even this leak doesn't contain any evidence of anything that would even tie it to Russia, let alone GRU. On the internet no one knows you're a dog. So she will get 10 years in the slammer for nothing.

go read her social postings, she wasn't thinking clearly as its pretty obvious she was acting irrational hatred of the current administration. people like this are easy to spot, how in the hell do they get clearance? how do they keep it?

Seriously, go read her twitter. That's what gets my tinfoil hatting. She sounds like a mid-range bot. Her account runs from Oct 2016 to Feb 2017. She only has one mode and its Trump sucks.

I have too many theories, but first we need to figure out if there is such a person: That's right, I'm questioning Reality.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#177

Post by nthcolumn »

fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #164

* Our leaker is a person with a Twitter timeline that makes you wonder how she maintained her Secret clearance. She retweets @Snowden, yet was hired at Pluribus in Feb. of this year, days after doing so. * The story is a huge black eye for the Intercept, makes it look like they are very inept. * The leak is not really substantial, mostly analyst notes about an ongoing thing that's been talked up in the press quite a…

Feeding information to the enemy is not a new tactic either in the form of misinformation to mislead or of mountweasels to flush out moles. Perhaps she did not expect them to publish originals. They do seem inept. But then their warez aren't all over the internet and I cannot see it doing anything other than educating potential leakers as to the necessity to at least think about opsec. So if that was NSA's game then that too is inept. It stinks though.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#178

Post by JeremyBanks »

braderhart wrote: post #41
chakalakasp wrote: post #16

Any article that ends with a yes/no question is always answered with "no". This one is no exception. Print classified info out at work on work printers from a monitored work computer you are logged into and said info ends up with reporters days later? Reporters you communicated with over gmail ?! This person isn't exactly an infosec genius. Which, I mean, isn't a sin or anything, but when you know the organization yo…

Unless you are a whistleblower and feel that the public legitimately needs to know about something, because afterall this election affects our daily lives. We deserve to to know the truth about threats to democracy, especially when Presidential candidates are still claiming that voter data was rigged. Didn't Trump blame Hillary for him losing the popular vote, saying that it was her fault for hacking the election?

Was it really vital that this tidbit be leaked right now now? Mueller is currently performing an extremely detailed official investigation of this topic and has access to this and much more information, the resources to follow up, the motive to find the truth.

Whistleblowing is warranted in cases where information pertinent to the public interest won't come out otherwise. Given Mueller's investigation, the responsible thing would have been to wait and see, unless you had reason to doubt him.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#179

Post by zipwitch »

throwaway-1209 wrote: post #24

Nah. Only 6 people have printed the doc and of those only one could be found in phone call metadata making a call to a press related contact. I don't know what the leaker was thinking. And in the end even this leak doesn't contain any evidence of anything that would even tie it to Russia, let alone GRU. On the internet no one knows you're a dog. So she will get 10 years in the slammer for nothing.

Senator Mark Warner publicly commented today that this is not the full extent of Russian attacks. She has succeeded in opening national high-profile public discussion on another aspect of Russian attacks on our election.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#180

Post by hsod »

grandalf wrote: post #173
hsod wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would constitute evidence in this context? To me, this statement which was: * made contemporaneously with the investigation * by experts * not intended for public consumption is evidence. It's not a formal proof, but it's evidence.

> by experts Experts in what? Security research or PR?

This is not a PR document, it is a (leaked) internal classified NSA intelligence report. It was presumably prepared by NSA intelligence analysts, who are experts in analyzing intelligence.
Post reply on HN