61–70 of 80 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what if the name leaks and some hapless computer-unsavvy person happens to call John's Computer Services to help him get rid of the 32 rows of IE toolbars on his Pentium IV-based PC running Windows Vista? At least Titanpointe sounds like a government codename and something vaguely menacing that you shouldn't really mess with.
how about an actual computer services shop as a front?
I just assume every MMR in every data center/building is an NSA hub.
(My greatest enjoyment, however, was that Level 3 was on the 3rd floor.)
I dislike this article whenever it comes up in that it conflates the NSA activity at the site (TITANPOINTE) with the building in a very confusing way. The building is not an NSA building, it is an AT&T building. The NSA is a tenant, along with many other organizations who use the building for meet-me and internet exchange purposes. It's absolutely true that the NSA has a concerning relationship with AT&T that has evi…
The key here is you are being spied on by your government in the heart of NYC and AT&T is helping.
The video with this article takes the motif further with a sort-of X-Files like presentation and set of mysterious sounding voiceovers.
From the start, I thought this building reminds me of the one Will Smith’s character reported to in “Men in Black.”
To some extent all information in news is editorialized for an angle that draws the reader in.
Could it be the truths of this story are so well known to you that it is hard to enjoy the way this is presented? Perhaps, in the same way the TV show “Silicon Valley” is unattractive to some startup founders as too close to home?
I dislike this article whenever it comes up in that it conflates the NSA activity at the site (TITANPOINTE) with the building in a very confusing way. The building is not an NSA building, it is an AT&T building. The NSA is a tenant, along with many other organizations who use the building for meet-me and internet exchange purposes. It's absolutely true that the NSA has a concerning relationship with AT&T that has evi…
Started reading this and thought "I bet this is the computer.rip person" and then saw your username. I really enjoy your articles, thank you.
I dislike this article whenever it comes up in that it conflates the NSA activity at the site (TITANPOINTE) with the building in a very confusing way. The building is not an NSA building, it is an AT&T building. The NSA is a tenant, along with many other organizations who use the building for meet-me and internet exchange purposes. It's absolutely true that the NSA has a concerning relationship with AT&T that has evi…
That said, how many cages or suites are leased by an intelligence agency isn’t really germane… the fact that they are or were there at all is the news. The square footage is particularly irrelevant as the building and “condo” owners are known to perform various tasks for intelligence services.
Where that building is located and who is served by it make it very strategic, and it’s imo naive to assume that the security, intelligence and counterintelligence services weren’t stakeholders in the building and network designs in the 60s and 70s. (A heyday for illegal behaviors for these entities)
I dislike this article whenever it comes up in that it conflates the NSA activity at the site (TITANPOINTE) with the building in a very confusing way. The building is not an NSA building, it is an AT&T building. The NSA is a tenant, along with many other organizations who use the building for meet-me and internet exchange purposes. It's absolutely true that the NSA has a concerning relationship with AT&T that has evi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it attractive? It looks extremely oppressive. I remember coming by that building while walking through Manhattan by chance and thinking this must be some government surveillance center or something.
Although I know that some people prefer brutalist architecture, there's definitely a case to be made about the design of a building meant to house communications in a free nation that prides itself with the first amendment, you would think they would make it transparent or all-glass and even go out of their way to make the corners of the building see through. Maybe something like Mies Van der Rohe's Westmount Square…
https://www.gsa.gov/historic-buildings/everett-m-dirksen-us-...
You can see right through it: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8784431,-87.6293035,3a,37.5y...
The real gem of the Federal Plaza is actually the post office building. When you walk inside you have the feeling of a floating ceiling with no columns (there are well-hidden columns).
I'm more appalled by the need to lousily tape this 72pt Calibri label on what is indubitably an intercom at the entrance of an "intelligence" agency: https://theintercept.imgix.net/wp-uploads/sites/1/2016/11/st...
It's also an AT&T building. It's possible that under it is a Ma Bell logo or something ancient from the long, crazy corporate history of American telecoms.
I remember walking by the AT&T building (one with windows) in my city and noticing how it looked basically abandoned at street level despite being in active use.
I think telecoms just don't spend money on stuff like that because it has no return on investment for them. They're like your neighborhood dive bar that owns the land with no plans to sell/leave/lease out space (since the building is physically attached to their product), therefore has no financial incentive to improve the building.
Plus, their customers have no choice but to use them even if walking by the building makes them think negatively of the company. Nothing a half-funny commercial with an overused spokesperson can't fix!
That intercom buzzer still works so there's no reason to replace it. There's no money in the budget for a nice sign, so the employee printed something out and taped it there, because that's what's in the supply cabinet.
I dislike this article whenever it comes up in that it conflates the NSA activity at the site (TITANPOINTE) with the building in a very confusing way. The building is not an NSA building, it is an AT&T building. The NSA is a tenant, along with many other organizations who use the building for meet-me and internet exchange purposes. It's absolutely true that the NSA has a concerning relationship with AT&T that has evi…
It’s an intercept piece, so there’s always the drama and eye roll associated with them. That said, how many cages or suites are leased by an intelligence agency isn’t really germane… the fact that they are or were there at all is the news. The square footage is particularly irrelevant as the building and “condo” owners are known to perform various tasks for intelligence services. Where that building is located and wh…
What the NSA does at 33 Thomas is not special, it is mundane. And that is much more frightening. If anything I suspect the NSA's intercept infrastructure is inferior to that of the FBI, because it's more likely to be legacy and because the NSA likely insists on transitioning the data to one of their own networks (which AT&T almost certainly has a hand in operating). There's talk in the documents of an NSA engineer having to work on an intercept project... rather surprising as law enforcement agencies just fill out the form and get the data! I suspect the NSA wanted to set up its own crypto equipment in an AT&T facility.
The possibility that the NSA was somehow involved in the design of the building is a theory with little evidence, and seems unlikely: AT&T had fairly detailed design standards for telephone offices, drawn from a variety of papers in e.g. BSTJ exploring the different practical factors. Even more elaborate design requirements were imposed by Cold War research on nuclear survivability by the military and AEC, and military concerns of sabotage (which had been a design consideration in telecom networks since WWII when it was feared the Japanese would come ashore sneakily and destroy West Coast telephone infrastructure, although this never occurred). It's difficult to imagine an NSA desire that the building would not have met: they could obtain space for equipment/technicians, cross-connections, and access to their own secure networks in any major exchange. The facilities were highly secure by virtue of being major exchanges. The NSA does apparently have a SCIF there but "SCIFing" existing spaces, i.e. in leased buildings, is a well understood process that doesn't require any special involvement (and couldn't have anyway as the modern SCIF concept is newer than the building).
Indeed, if the NSA has been so deeply involved in 33 Thomas, perhaps because of it being a critical exchange in the international network, one would wonder if they are similarly involved in other such exchanges like Mojave, or SCPs such as those of the competitive long distance carriers? I'm sure they are, no speculation about the architect's loyalties required.