Live data from Hacker News

Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

ietf.org

51–60 of 395 posts

Re: Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

#51
post #40
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally just posted a dismissal of your claims in a sibling comment. You owe it to yourself to think critically about what you think you want out of intelligence services, being secretive is one thing, not permitting any oversight is not ok and being in direct violation of the law is also not ok. It's not a hypothetical situation, people were using these tools to stalk women for crying out loud, you can't defend…

There isn't a system in the world which isn't subject to abuse, every police force in the world for example suffers from it. Some people such as yourself take that to mean they need to be torn down, the rest of us just think it means there needs to be more controls to minimize those abuses. It's not as though MOST of the activity of these agencies is stalking women, and it's profoundly disingenuous to pretend otherwi…

How is anyone to say what most of the activity of these agencies are without any oversight. That’s why the leaks happened in the first place, it was the only way to say ‘hey we need more controls on this stuff’. Unless you’re suggesting that was going to happen anyway somehow?

Re: Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

#52
When the Snowden docs came out, the main thing that surprised me wasn't the tech, it was the scale. I thought I had seen the tip of the iceberg doing security work for over 15y prior, but I had barely seen ripples in the surface. Most of what I saw would have been in the category of "BULLRUN," which I incorporate into client threat models today, but also some of the ISP interception equipment I saw at peering points / IX's during the 90s that had just been called "some old police telco stuff, ignore it."

I think an unintended consequence was that it also emboldened a lot of authoritarian personalities to just say, "yeah, we do this, you are with us or against us, here's the line, toe it." A decade later, participation in elite circles like media, academia, and politics is based on how convincingly one can be seen to parrot obvious untruths, not because anyone believes them at all, but because it signals status to be able to lie to the faces of people who know you are doing it, and still say nothing.

Snowden's leaks were an unambiguous act of conscience. They made sustaining dissonance about how the sausage of empire gets made a lot harder for regular people - even if we also learned that most people really just like sausage.

I tolerate the spook-adjacent types in my field who parrot absurd official lines and slogans about russian interference because being seen to align with it is just how they are trying to survive, and I can't judge what people do to keep their families fed. But the ones who know what's true, yet take a kind of pleasure in repeating official lies because it makes them feel powerful - I think the real impact Snowden had is showing people like that for what they are, and how low the bar is for getting involved in public service and just doing better. There are amazing people in public service, and they are mostly sidelined by a minority of these eels who demoralize their agencies by normalizing small acts of deviance, corruption, and partisan favours. You can change that.

The best way for a technologist to leverage their skills to effect change in government is to go get a Privacy Professional certification https://iapp.org/certify/cipp/, and do work for your state, municipality, or a federal agency. Privacy laws everywhere got absolutely gutted over the pandemic, but the work privacy pros did in the decade prior prevented some of the worst abuses by people leveraging that crisis, and it's going to take a lot of smart technical people working in government to ensure there are technical limits on what a few sleazy appointees like the very ones who exploited 9/11 to build the panopticon Snowden exposed, can do.

Re: Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

#53

Realistically intelligence agencies have access to whatever information they want. If they can crack encryption they're not going to tell us and they will probably act like they can't. You're compromised and you have no secrets and can't hide anything from them. The best thing we can do is stay safe from criminals.

Some cyphers maybe. But it's highly unlikely that all or even most in use are compromised. There are many cryptography researchers who aren't part of the NSA. Other nations for example. And banks obviously trust some cryptography.

Re: Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

#54
post #44

>Intelligence professionals talk about how disorienting it is living on the inside. You read so much classified information about the world’s geopolitical events that you start seeing the world differently. You become convinced that only the insiders know what’s really going on, because the news media is so often wrong. Your family is ignorant. Your friends are ignorant. The world is ignorant. The only thing keeping…

To take what you've said a little further, intelligence agencies have the "law" behind them, but once you become aware of everything they (all of them, worldwide) are doing, you get a completely different perspective on the "law" itself.

Being involved in these activities can also diminish your ethical base, which I guess explains some of the crazy law-ignoring/law-breaking activities within all governments.

Re: Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

#55

I think people would be surprised and sickened to know just how cooperative the big tech companies are with the intelligence agencies. Microsoft is especially cooperative, even as going so far to make sure their systems are compatible with surveillance systems. Yes, Telcos have had to this as well, but I don’t think many people know that Microsoft has proactively done this.

Honestly, people couldn't care less.

youtube has radicalized jihadi terrorists and white supremacists, facebook has manipulated emotions and played a role facilitating genocide in myanmar, tiktok is controlled by a genocidal regime, instagram depresses teen girls…

though this isn’t much new I suppose, how many times has nike been caught using child labor? how many waterways has nestle depleted, how many animals have been tortured for cosmetics… how many bison were slaughtered to spite the natives, how many whales for lamp oil…

we seem to always find something or someone to exploit

Re: Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

#56
post #53

Realistically intelligence agencies have access to whatever information they want. If they can crack encryption they're not going to tell us and they will probably act like they can't. You're compromised and you have no secrets and can't hide anything from them. The best thing we can do is stay safe from criminals.

Some cyphers maybe. But it's highly unlikely that all or even most in use are compromised. There are many cryptography researchers who aren't part of the NSA. Other nations for example. And banks obviously trust some cryptography.

Even if they were compromised I imagine the nsa would probably hesitate to use it in a detectable way and "save it for a real threat"

Re: Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

#57
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose this is supposed to make Snowden look bad. It doesn't. The author is James Clapper, who Snowden's revelations proved lied in Congressional testimony about whether the NSA was collecting information on millions of Americans. So when he says that "multiple executive branch agencies, Congress, and federal courts [...] were all aware of and conducted oversight of the very programs that concerned [Snowden]," he'…

[flagged]

He didn't just ran to Russia, he went to China first.

It would be lot more believable he did it for the greater good, if he only took documents related to internal spying (and not bunch of other stuff) and if he didn't take the documents on joyride through territories of biggest ideological enemies of his home country.

But now he has to live in Russia, which I guess is punishment enough.

Re: Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

#59
post #44

>Intelligence professionals talk about how disorienting it is living on the inside. You read so much classified information about the world’s geopolitical events that you start seeing the world differently. You become convinced that only the insiders know what’s really going on, because the news media is so often wrong. Your family is ignorant. Your friends are ignorant. The world is ignorant. The only thing keeping…

So true. And don’t forget that these agencies answer to an elite group of people that benefit from specific world orders that promote various industrial complexes transnationally.

And people that get too specific get daphnied, lombardied, assanged or jfk’ed.

Or maybe not, but you won't find out because all media above a certain threshold is in a spotlight, and has been since before CIA bragged about its all encompassing media operations 50+ years ago.

I remember this info being somewhat widespread when the internet was still new, but wikis, forums and blogs are slowly being disappeared from search or drowned in noise while clownish conspiracies have conveniently smoke-screened all attempts to create an alternative to the status quo.

Re: Reflections on Ten Years Past the Snowden Revelations

#60
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose this is supposed to make Snowden look bad. It doesn't. The author is James Clapper, who Snowden's revelations proved lied in Congressional testimony about whether the NSA was collecting information on millions of Americans. So when he says that "multiple executive branch agencies, Congress, and federal courts [...] were all aware of and conducted oversight of the very programs that concerned [Snowden]," he'…

[flagged]

This is such a ridiculous take. The fact that Snowden did not somehow martyr himself enough for you has no bearing on the important information that he leaked. He could have easily kept his mouth shut and enjoyed his cushy job in Hawaii like so many others do. Instead he threw it all away and is now stuck in Russia. Now you’re saying that we shouldn’t look at anything he revealed because he’s not willing to speak out against Putin and get thrown in the gulag? What would be a sufficient level of martyrdom for you? Should he have set himself on fire on the steps of the Capitol?
Post reply on HN