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

231–240 of 245 posts

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#231

Post by samer66 »

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…

Both the Intercept and the Washington post has one thing in common,Bezos who received $600 million contract from the CIA:"Meanwhile, a petition campaign was launched related to news that Amazon, under the Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, recently secured a $600 million contract from the CIA. That’s at least twice what Bezos paid for the Post this year. Bezos recently disclosed that the company’s Web-services business is building a “private cloud” for the CIA to use for its data needs.

Critics charge that, at a minimum, the Post needs to disclose its CIA link whenever it reports on the agency. Over 15,000 have signed the petition this week hosted by RootsAction." http://www.hangthebankers.com/washington-post-owner-receives...

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#232

Post by samer66 »

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…

Both the Intercept and the Washington post has one thing in common,Bezos who received $600 million contract from the CIA:"Meanwhile, a petition campaign was launched related to news that Amazon, under the Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, recently secured a $600 million contract from the CIA. That’s at least twice what Bezos paid for the Post this year. Bezos recently disclosed that the company’s Web-services business is building a “private cloud” for the CIA to use for its data needs.

Critics charge that, at a minimum, the Post needs to disclose its CIA link whenever it reports on the agency. Over 15,000 have signed the petition this week hosted by RootsAction." http://www.hangthebankers.com/washington-post-owner-receives...

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#233

Post by samer66 »

danso wrote: post #168
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…

She had top secret clearance prior to being hired by Pluribus in February. She was formerly in the Air Force and apparently specialized in Middle Eastern languages. Apparently, top secret clearance is renewed every 5 years [0], so she may have had carte blanche to do what she wanted for a few years. [0] http://www.military.com/veteran-jobs/security-clearance-jobs...

Both the Intercept and the Washington post have one thing in common, Bezos who received $600 million contract from the CIA:"Meanwhile, a petition campaign was launched related to news that Amazon, under the Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, recently secured a $600 million contract from the CIA. That’s at least twice what Bezos paid for the Post this year. Bezos recently disclosed that the company’s Web-services business is building a “private cloud” for the CIA to use for its data needs.

Critics charge that, at a minimum, the Post needs to disclose its CIA link whenever it reports on the agency. Over 15,000 have signed the petition this week hosted by RootsAction." http://www.hangthebankers.com/washington-post-owner-receives...

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#234

Post by samer66 »

danso wrote: post #168
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…

She had top secret clearance prior to being hired by Pluribus in February. She was formerly in the Air Force and apparently specialized in Middle Eastern languages. Apparently, top secret clearance is renewed every 5 years [0], so she may have had carte blanche to do what she wanted for a few years. [0] http://www.military.com/veteran-jobs/security-clearance-jobs...

Both the Intercept and the Washington post have one thing in common, Bezos who received $600 million contract from the CIA:"Meanwhile, a petition campaign was launched related to news that Amazon, under the Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, recently secured a $600 million contract from the CIA. That’s at least twice what Bezos paid for the Post this year. Bezos recently disclosed that the company’s Web-services business is building a “private cloud” for the CIA to use for its data needs.

Critics charge that, at a minimum, the Post needs to disclose its CIA link whenever it reports on the agency. Over 15,000 have signed the petition this week hosted by RootsAction." http://www.hangthebankers.com/washington-post-owner-receives...

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#236

Post by hsod »

mladenkovacevic wrote: post #227
hsod wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the case of hacking, our assessment must include a notion of how easy it would be for a nation or group to be falsely implicated. > Separately, there must be a discussion of motive apart from specific evidence. But what we're seeing is a blurring together of various tiny pieces of data, analysis, guesswork, etc., into a narrative. Do you believe that the intelligence community has failed to consider these fairly…

And you've constructed a belief system that we better believe anything that comes out of the NSA about adversaries of the US because well, I feel the NSA is really competent and what else are we supposed to believe anyways. My belief system isn't convincing me that Russians didn't hack the election system, or that they aren't capable of it. Just that this particular document is not the smoking gun.

I never said it was a smoking gun. I said it was evidence.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#237

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

phaus wrote: post #194
fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how that works, but I'd be surprised if there were not a sort-of abbreviated check?

There are things that can easily be detected and cause you to have issues with a clearance. For example, if you get arrested or have other significant legal issues, someone will probably find out. Also, if you stop paying your bills long enough to have severe credit issues, someone will likely find out about that too. For social media activity, someone would likely have to report you for anyone to take action. I for…

People with security clearances are under 24/7 surveillance. They sign away their 4th amendment rights by agreeing to the terms of EO12333 and the gov can do anything as part of its investigation process. Sort of foolish for anyone with TS to be blabbing about such things on social media but you know, kids these days.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#238

Post by shard972 »

hsod wrote: post #195
grandalf wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no supporting evidence for the assertion that it was "Russia" or about the nature of the "hacking groups". There is also no consideration of the possibility of false attribution of the above. Suppose I see that an enemy wears size 10.5 Adidas sneakers. If I buy an identical pair and leave muddy footprints with them near a crime scene, does the presence of the footprints implicate my adversary? In the case of…

> In the case of hacking, our assessment must include a notion of how easy it would be for a nation or group to be falsely implicated. > Separately, there must be a discussion of motive apart from specific evidence. But what we're seeing is a blurring together of various tiny pieces of data, analysis, guesswork, etc., into a narrative. Do you believe that the intelligence community has failed to consider these fairly…

What If i told you in that report in which "17 agencies all agreed that Russia did it", one agency only had moderate confidence (50%~ chance) and it was the NSA.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#239

Post by shard972 »

grandalf wrote: post #199
hsod wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the case of hacking, our assessment must include a notion of how easy it would be for a nation or group to be falsely implicated. > Separately, there must be a discussion of motive apart from specific evidence. But what we're seeing is a blurring together of various tiny pieces of data, analysis, guesswork, etc., into a narrative. Do you believe that the intelligence community has failed to consider these fairly…

> has failed to consider these fairly obvious principles No, but I think that those spreading these kinds of reports are intentionally masking the way that they are meant to be used in intelligence circles. This happened during the buildup to the Iraq war also. My point is that the reports make those leaps intentionally in order to support higher order analysis. They are not meant to be taken as a distillation of all…

One thing I find weird about people who are obsessed with the Russia scandal is that they seem to believe that if "involvement" is proven, it's over for the trump administration.

I really don't understand that at all because if we want to get real, the OPM china hack was bigger than most of the things being alleged at the moment by stealing the database of everyone with a security clearance and yet, not a peep from anybody.

It would seem if you were consistent about cyber threats, these people yelling for sanctions on Russia should be yelling for sanctions on China as well.

Re: Did the Intercept bungle the NSA leak?

#240

Post by shard972 »

dlp211 wrote: post #218
throwaway-1209 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was, until this administration, somewhat rare for the press to _knowingly_ publish nothing but lies, and yet here we are. CNN (!) got caught on camera the other day stage managing a "Muslim protest" for the news. That's something that would cause a massive scandal just a year ago. These days everyone is so used to it no one even noticed.

No it didn't[1]. [1] http://www.snopes.com/cnn-muslim-protests-london/

Snopes is a complete joke now.

That aside, I don't see how it's rated false. Just because they claim "well this is how we do things" doesn't make what they have been doing for years any less fake.

I understand they didn't go out, pay some actors to hold some signs up but the scene itself was created and crafted for the TV and in my opinion that's fake.

The media is supposed to be informing the public, when you start using tricks to an attempt to hoodwink your audience into your narrative that's the opposite of informing the public.

All they had to do was point out either that they brought a few protesters over from the main protest to show you them specifically, or maybe a better idea yet, just go to the protest and turn the camera on so we can see what is actually happening, not what they are staging for us.

Post reply on HN