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

The NSA: An Inside View

lorensr.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 323 posts

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#91

Post by sitkack »

lorendsr wrote: post #35
jjoonathan wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand, I completely buy his assertions about China's pervasive hacking attempts/successes and that the NSA is our best tool for stopping them. On the other hand, you're right on the money about parallel construction. In my book, that's the one thing that sent the NSA "over the line." It's good to hear that many NSA employees take the police/military distinction seriously, but we know for a fact that some higher…

Thanks for letting me know about parallel construction - I hadn't heard of it. You're right, abuses probably have happened more often than those caught.

Have you heard of COINTELPRO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO and the Church Committee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee ?

Quiz, where did the FISA court come from?

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10262007/profile2.html

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#92

Post by windexh8er »

sitkack wrote: post #76
rst wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's particularly interesting is that some of the recent disclosures don't seem to be visible inside the bubble. Take this assertion, for instance: "The NSA copy of my emails won't be viewed by police or FBI investigating me about marijuana use, for instance. Law enforcement might get a search warrant and retrieve a copy from Google, but not from the NSA." In fact, it's been known for months that the DEA receives i…

It really depends on how widely it is reported. Government employees even those with clearance are prohibited from looking at the wikileaks cables. If it makes it into the NYT and they see it, then it is ok. But they can't actively dig for it. Direct from the mouths of government employees.

Again, an assumption that a magical unicorn guards the morality of being told what someone can or cannot do should be understood as a non-trustworthy system. Especially one that is referred to as the NSA in very general terms - as they have no control over employees or data dissemination / exfiltration. And, yes, the last statement is fact based on all of the supporting evidence in the public domain. If one thinks otherwise I politely redirect you back to aforementioned magical unicorns.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#93

Post by colinbartlett »

nexttimer wrote: post #58

Don't fight it. Just let it take over. Stop struggling. Once you'll have stopped struggling, it won't hurt anymore. You won't feel any difference anymore. And it will be like it was never different.

"We do not merely destroy our enemies; we change them."

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#94

Post by hnriot »

colinbartlett wrote: post #90
kabdib wrote: post #32

"Even if you are not a citizen of the Five Eyes, you shouldn't be worried about your data being viewed unless you're involved with a group of interest, such as a foreign government or violent organization." Huh, so: - My best friend's dad was a spy in the CIA - During the 70s and 80s my dad worked with Russian scientists (also ones from Poland and other Communist Bloc countries). Ecology stuff, mostly. - I've been in…

You have a great point, and the TL;DR of OP's entire post is "Unless you're doing something wrong, you have nothing to worry about." Which is the slimmest argument I ever hear in favor of these pervasive civil rights violations. I've never been a terrorist, never given any information to a foreign enemy, hell, I've barely ever even broken the law. But I do have a personal interest in Russia, speak Russian, and have b…

Doubt it, Russia isn't the enemy anymore, it is a country in disarray, trying to pick up the pieces after communism.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#95

Post by lorendsr »

intslack wrote: post #64
lorendsr wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant that the NSA is only looking at your information if a judge suspects that you are a foreign agent. It will not look at your information to determine whether you have done something else illegal, which is what it would do if it were part of a police state.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE... >One current federal prosecutor learned how agents were using SOD tips after a drug agent misled him, the prosecutor told Reuters. In a Florida drug case he was handling, the prosecutor said, a DEA agent told him the investigation of a U.S. citizen began with a tip from an informant. When the prosecutor pressed for more information, he said, a DEA superv…

That sounds illegal. In same article:

>Wiretap tips forwarded by the SOD usually come from foreign governments, U.S. intelligence agencies or court-authorized domestic phone recordings. Because warrantless eavesdropping on Americans is illegal, tips from intelligence agencies are generally not forwarded to the SOD until a caller's citizenship can be verified, according to one senior law enforcement official and one former U.S. military intelligence analyst.

"Generally" should be always.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#96

Post by appleflaxen »

lorendsr wrote: post #35
jjoonathan wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand, I completely buy his assertions about China's pervasive hacking attempts/successes and that the NSA is our best tool for stopping them. On the other hand, you're right on the money about parallel construction. In my book, that's the one thing that sent the NSA "over the line." It's good to hear that many NSA employees take the police/military distinction seriously, but we know for a fact that some higher…

Thanks for letting me know about parallel construction - I hadn't heard of it. You're right, abuses probably have happened more often than those caught.

How can you defend a program in a public way like this without having the most basic understanding of what we know about it? Parallel construction is one of the basic story lines that has come out of the Snowden leaks.

They painted fascism with an American flag, and you ran it up the pole.

In a way its' embarrassing for the NSA to get a defence that is written by such a rube. But at the same time, the general public doesn't seem to be concerned, so perhaps it was unnecessary in the first place.

I could be wrong, but I think there is a bit of cognitive dissonance in your statement. I think you are slowly coming to realize that your actions were wrong; that you do need to defend them. The bad news is that you you fucked up, and you owe the Americans you pretend to care about an apology.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#97

Post by DigitalSea »

Stockholm syndrome?

This guy is essentially validating the actions of the NSA because he calls himself a patriot and even admits he doesn't care about other countries other than his own: The United States of America. As an Australian I find this kind of attitude disgusting and I think it highlights a massive problem within the agency itself.

While I am somewhat more lucky than others being in a country that is part of the Five Eyes agreement, what about those not in a country that has signed the agreement? It doesn't make me feel any safer because it seems the concept of borders and rules in the intelligence game do not exist.

There is a lot of downplaying, "but your data is in a big database and nobody will most likely ever look at it", "only the NSA can see this data" — while this might be the case, if for whatever reason I found myself in a position of power, this kind of harvested information could be used to blackmail or destroy me. Just because it's not being used now doesn't mean it won't be used later.

While this is probably the only validation of the NSA's actions I can find that is somewhat backed by someone with experience working for the agency, it honestly sounds a little too safe and doesn't really address any of the concerns people have.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#98

Post by middleclick »

droithomme wrote: post #87

This article is transparent propaganda. Author is not a patriot. Author is an enemy of the people.

If the author is indeed the patriot he claims he is, would he be so kind to explain why the Bill of Rights thought it necessary to have this:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

What makes the NSA different from the police or other law enforcement agencies? And why should we trust them? There is a reason restrictions exist on the power they have. This article is nothing more than propaganda.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#99

Post by leot »

lukifer wrote: post #22
Zigurd wrote: post #4

Is this the best defense of the actions of NSA employees publicly available? He spends a lot of time denying pervasive surveillance puts us in a panopticon where the FBI and other LEAs can observe everything we do. And never mentions parallel construction once. He tries to justify a Cold War sized, and then some, security state by invoking North Korea. This is a big bowl of very weak sauce. The director's standard of…

There's also little analysis (here or elsewhere) of the consequences of widespread data warehousing. Why pay agents to listen to personal calls, when you can stockpile intel for the day you might need it, and analyze it via algorithm? I foresee a day when every American has a dossier, a smear campaign, and a law enforcement attack plan on file, in case they decide to "make trouble" for the powerful. It's highly proba…

It would be great to see a cheerful launch page for a satirical startup that automatically generated smear campaigns for governments against persons of interest. "We use of the expanded information capabilities of our client agencies to maximize the plausibility of our allegations!"

Pricing!

$8,000: General fear, uncertainty, and doubt (duration: 2 months)

$15,000: Complete discrediting (duration: 6 months -- best value!)

$50,000: Overturn their life with "Anonymous"-style harassment (e.g. triggered by c pornography "revelations" -- duration: two years)

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#100

Post by jpkeisala »

te_chris wrote: post #8

Thank you so much, kind American intelligence guy, for having the grace to not look at USA citizens emails, all the while not even mentioning foreigners, who should apparently just lie down and take it.

On the Internet we foreigners are colonies and the Americans are our Masters.
Post reply on HN