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

181–190 of 202 posts

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#181

Post by david_shaw »

mpyne wrote: post #139
david_shaw wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I saw the Google/Facebook responses, it was obvious that the posts had a lot in common. Both used the phrase "direct access to our servers". When you see a phrase repeated like that, one of two things has happened. Either one copied the other's phrasing, or someone told them what to say. In either case, the legal department would definitely weigh in on a huge issue like this. I totally agree that these organiz…

(D) the slide doesn't actually say 'direct access', but says 'collection directly from the servers of', which is different. My browser pulled the comment I'm replying to right now 'directly from the servers of' HN, but I don't have 'direct access' to HN.

> (D) the slide doesn't actually say 'direct access', but says 'collection directly from the servers of', which is different. My browser pulled the comment I'm replying to right now 'directly from the servers of' HN, but I don't have 'direct access' to HN.

The slide I'm talking about ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-... ) states: "collection directly from the servers of these U.S. Service Providers."

Since there's currently no way to "browse" private data on, say, my Google search history or my GMail inbox, the conclusion seems to be that they either have broad backdoor access, or a specific way of directly downloading from these companies.

In a traditional warrant situation, the data would be collected by the companies and sent to the requesting agency that provided a warrant. Police officers that request, say, HTTP access logs do not download those logs directly.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#182

Post by rdixit »

specialist wrote: post #144
chrissnell wrote: post #131

For those with security clearances, clicking on a random HN link is risking your job and livelihood. It's easy to see a link to WikiLeaks and avoid that but when it's the WP posting it, not so much. These articles really need to be flagged/tagged by HN and by the newspapers that publish them. I don't want to see a TS/SCI-classified document and I don't want to be seen as seeking them out. I love the technical stories…

Do we need a new tag? [OPENSECRET]? Listening to Democracy Now this morning, one of the defense witnesses in the Manning trial explained that many, many of classified documented Manning is accused of leaking are also publicly available via government websites or in the media. For instance, personal details of detainees at gitmo. I'm struggling to understand how information which is in the public domain can be classif…

AFAIK this is primarily for the purposes of avoiding the court system. Things that are classified seem to be dealt with by the rubber-stamp FISA courts instead of the actual judicial system so they can avoid being challenged in the light of day.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#183

Post by rsingel »

mpyne wrote: post #140
acqq wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even without CALEA, if I'm reading the press coverage right, the FISA orders to which Google comply once they check that they were issued by FISC can be very broad, including "give me ALL the metadata you have" in a single order. Because "taking all metadata an storing it indefinitely is nothing to be worried about" in NSA interpretations.

Well all metadata wouldn't work as that could be used to intercept U.S. persons' data. The warrant/NSL would have to list by name/UID at the very least, but once it's established that the UID in question is foreign and a part of an investigation then you are right that the warrant/NSL can be very broad.

Actually, yes, the feds are using Section 215 of the Patriot Act to get FISC orders on all metadata of Americans' domestic phone and internet communications from ISPs and phone companies. The feds are leveraging a theory that you have no privacy interest in your metadata, thus no 4th Amendment violation.

It's not clear at all that this is legal, especially given the Supreme Court's recent ruling in Jones, requiring warrants for GPS tracking of automobiles.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#184

Post by dil8 »

monochromatic wrote: post #180
david_shaw wrote: post #115

After seeing this article today, I made a post on Facebook to explain to some of my friends that aren't closely following the PRISM story that this is not compatible with the statements released by Mark Zuckerberg, Marissa Mayer, and Larry Page. I'll reproduce some of my post here--I'd link directly, but my Facebook is set to 'private.' Remember when Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), Marissa Mayer (Yahoo!) and Larry Page (…

> Facebook is set to 'private.' LOL

Yeah, I noticed that too haha

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#185

Post by sdoering »

clarkm wrote: post #70
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…

James Bamford also wrote and produced the PBS NOVA documentary "The Spy Factory", which is available for streaming on Netflix. Edit: It looks like it's been removed from Netflix, but you can still stream it directly from PBS's website: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/spy-factory.html

Well to bad I'm sitting in the wrong region of this localized internet. As so often the interesting resources are hidden behind a location-filter.

[irony] As we are used in Germany, we are kept in the dark. [irony end]

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#186

Post by nwombosi »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #168
b6 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't. I agree there's a little bit of wrongness to that, but I hope his parent post won't mind too much, because there's a lot of truth to his point. Often we get more information like this, a fuller understanding of how Americans have been paying billions of dollars to fund this surveillance weapon that threatens the human race, and find an extremely well-written post by an obviously highly intelligent tptacek…

Those posts usually have a lot of responses that rise to the challenge though, and without any opposition or advocacy for the devil, much less (or even nothing) is learned. I don't think it's fair to call him out like that, HN is better than this and posts can be dealt with on a one by one basis. Take off all the nicks, for maximum message resolution.

You guys are amazingly mature and civilized for a social website. You make reddit look like Aleppo!

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#187

Post by bincat »

david_shaw wrote: post #181
mpyne wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(D) the slide doesn't actually say 'direct access', but says 'collection directly from the servers of', which is different. My browser pulled the comment I'm replying to right now 'directly from the servers of' HN, but I don't have 'direct access' to HN.

> (D) the slide doesn't actually say 'direct access', but says 'collection directly from the servers of', which is different. My browser pulled the comment I'm replying to right now 'directly from the servers of' HN, but I don't have 'direct access' to HN. The slide I'm talking about ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/prism-... ) states: "collection directly from the servers of these U.S. Service…

Here is this link again: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=204063&cid=16678583

However one wants to define 'directly from the servers of' or 'direct access' I think for all intents and purposes it means the same thing.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#188

Post by VexXtreme »

specialist wrote: post #147
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…

Was expecting to find comment by tptacek explaining how WP's Craig Timberg has no journalistic integrity because "direct access" clearly doesn't mean the NSA gets whatever data it wants by whatever means necessary. Rather, "direct access" can only imply the NSA administers the credentials of each and every server and database existent, which clearly couldn't be true. Maybe he's busy. I'll check back.

I was just expecting to see him defending the NSA and telling us we're all wrong again.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#189

Post by tomgirl1 »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #22
sneak wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I could be wrong, but I think we are looking at screencaps of documents which have been captured on different screen sizes, where there was word wrapping occuring. I dont see evidence of editing.

Re: The NSA slide you haven’t seen

#190

Post by galenko »

sdoering wrote: post #185
clarkm wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

James Bamford also wrote and produced the PBS NOVA documentary "The Spy Factory", which is available for streaming on Netflix. Edit: It looks like it's been removed from Netflix, but you can still stream it directly from PBS's website: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/spy-factory.html

Well to bad I'm sitting in the wrong region of this localized internet. As so often the interesting resources are hidden behind a location-filter. [irony] As we are used in Germany, we are kept in the dark. [irony end]

Here it is on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdPpdu8OGDQ
Post reply on HN