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

The NSA slide you haven’t seen

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 202 posts

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#21

Post by samsnelling »

runjake wrote: post #18

Once again, I suggest everyone interested read James Bamford's book Shadow Factory. All these revelations regarding call metadata, PRISM collection (albeit under a different codename at the time), modern fiber taps, and even more are covered. You'll learn about how they shave fiber optic cables in order to intercept traffic and not be detected. You'll find out about the various facilities already reported, along with…

Thanks for this! I've been looking for more to read (I just went back and re-read 1984).

... I thought one of the points of Fiber was that you couldn't tap in without disturbing the optical signal? Did I just make that up in my head?

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#22

Post by ChuckMcM »

sneak wrote: post #9
oscilloscope wrote: post #6

It may have been published at the Post for the first time, but Guardian released this over a month ago. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-prism-server...

The codenames of some of the collection codenames were redacted: FAIRVIEW and BLARNEY were visible, STORMBREW and OAKSTAR were not. What's really quite interesting is that they're typeset differently on the redacted/unredacted slides. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-... http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/20... EDIT: Also, as the WaPo article points out, the map is di…

Exactly, one or both of these slides has been edited. I doubt that someone went back to the NSA to get "the latest version" that makes me wonder who did the editing and what was their motivation? Did the guardian change the map to make it more relevant to the "global nature" of their coverage? Did someone change it for WaPo to make it seem more credible? And the redacting part, who redacted it and why? Neither slide would have been released as part of a FOIA request it seems, so why the redactions? To make it look more "confidential" ? (there have been suggestions that redactions add 'authenticity' to purported documents from governments). Frankly it raises a lot more questions than it answers.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#23

Post by adrinavarro »

sneak wrote: post #12
danso wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was just about to post this, the only difference is that two of the secret program names are unredacted in the Wapo version.

As the article points out, the map is different in both as well. One shows CONUS, the other, the whole Earth.

It isn't, in some way. PowerPoint let's you "mask" images. That is, bundle the entire image in the PPT but crop and zoom it. Of course, whoever did that slide zoomed into the US. It isn't a purpose-made image, but rather, one illustrating how traffic flows to and from the U.S.

Fits perfectly with the "different software" idea. Pages, Google Docs, OpenOffice and even different versions of Office produce different results with the same PowerPoint.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#24

Post by redblacktree »

rythie wrote: post #13
btipling wrote: post #2

> "collection directly from the servers" So either Snowden has incorrect slides, the slides are falsified, or everyone has been lying. Actual evidence of direct access would be better than these slides. I would like someone from Google, Facebook, et al to testify under oath that there is no direct access. Or maybe even the NSA, but we know they share inaccuracies under oath, so maybe that isn't worth so much.

I wonder if anyone would be brave enough to test this, i.e. use TLS 1.2/forward security to one of sites mentioned, send a message to a "friend" (dumby account) that says you are planning an attack, and see what happens (i.e. it's only viewable by facebook/google whatever, not in transit)

Great idea! I nominate you.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#25

Post by [deleted] »

sneak wrote: post #9
oscilloscope wrote: post #6

It may have been published at the Post for the first time, but Guardian released this over a month ago. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-prism-server...

The codenames of some of the collection codenames were redacted: FAIRVIEW and BLARNEY were visible, STORMBREW and OAKSTAR were not. What's really quite interesting is that they're typeset differently on the redacted/unredacted slides. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-... http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/20... EDIT: Also, as the WaPo article points out, the map is di…

[deleted]

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#26

Post by minikites »

kimlelly wrote: post #3

Anyone still using - Microsoft - Yahoo - Google - Facebook - PalTalk - AOL - Skype - YouTube - or Apple? Yeah, I thought so. EDIT: Seriously, downvoters: you NEED TO WAKE THE FUCK UP !

Okay, thanks for the teenage-level politics. What do you suggest as an actual alternative? How do you personally know those alternatives are safer or more secure? How would you construct a recommendation for a small or medium company that relies on Skype/MS Office/Google to use alternatives and how would you train non-tech savvy employees? With what time and money?

That's why people are downvoting you. Not because they disagree but because your comment provides no actual information.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#28

Post by kimlelly »

I'll say it again, because I was immediately downvoted into invisibility:

You CAN NOT continue to use products and services by NSA companies like Microsoft - Yahoo - Google - Facebook - PalTalk - AOL - Skype - YouTube - or Apple and THEN turn around and BITCH AND CRY ABOUT LOSING YOUR RIGHTS AND PRIVACY.

This is completely INSANE, you NEED TO WAKE UP!

EDIT: Yeah, let the censuring begin again. You know what? When I look at the people here on HackerNews, I'm beginning to see a SOCIETY THAT ACTUALLY WANTS TO BE FUCKED - DEEPLY EVEN.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#29

Post by sneak »

adrinavarro wrote: post #23
sneak wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the article points out, the map is different in both as well. One shows CONUS, the other, the whole Earth.

It isn't, in some way. PowerPoint let's you "mask" images. That is, bundle the entire image in the PPT but crop and zoom it. Of course, whoever did that slide zoomed into the US. It isn't a purpose-made image, but rather, one illustrating how traffic flows to and from the U.S. Fits perfectly with the "different software" idea. Pages, Google Docs, OpenOffice and even different versions of Office produce different resu…

That would be congruent with the dropshadow displaying on the "You Should Use Both" text in the (presumably) PowerPoint-rendered one that is masked correctly. It doesn't seem to appear in the other.

EDIT: Also, on the US-zoomed/masked one, it makes the ellipses line up correctly with all the cable landings at the coastlines. I'm now sold that these differences are just PowerPoint-specific renderings.

Post reply on HN