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

201–210 of 323 posts

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#201

Post by csandreasen »

ytadesse wrote: post #167
csandreasen wrote: post #131

I see a lot of negativity in this thread, but I think a lot of folks should stop for just a moment and consider the opportunity that's presenting itself: a former employee of the NSA is posting online about his experience and is an active member of HN. He doesn't appear to be in a position where his continued employment with the government would be an issue (he's apparently got his own business), so he doesn't have t…

Huh? An intelligence officer is exactly the type of person who wouldn't "appear to be in a position where his continued employment with the government would be an issue" while actually still being a government employee. Who's to say that he isn't still working with the NSA? I'm far from a routine skeptic but c'mon ... This post sounds like a PR message.

Well, theoretically he could still be an intelligence officer. Claiming to be a former NSA employee who got out to start up a mayonnaise company is a frankly strange and unusually high-profile cover to work under. Maybe someone can order some mayo from him and tell us if he's legit.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lorensr/payo-paleo-mayo?...

Alternately, maybe this is some giant conspiracy to get us to buy NSA-sponsored mayonnaise.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#202

Post by CamperBob2 »

lorendsr wrote: post #95
intslack wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 f…

That sounds illegal.

Face, meet palm

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#203

Post by ridgeguy »

dmfdmf wrote: post #13

Translation: Trust us, we are the good guys. This blog post does nothing to answer the fundamental questions that the Snowden leaks have raised. This man basically argues that, with few exceptions, everyone that works for the NSA is a true American and a patriot who only has your interests at heart and what is a little spying amongst friends anyway. Follow that with some scary hints about cyber war with nuclear respo…

"Moreover, if what he says is true that we are facing real dangers then the government has the obligation, in a free society, to reveal these threats and explain what they are doing about it. "

Could not agree more. To make good decisions as a nation, we need good information. When everything's classified TS/SCI or above, most Americans are denied an accurate description of reality on which to base their decisions and their votes.

Bad guys may do bad things to us regardless of whether their conduct and methods are revealed to all or classified into invisibility. If the NSA revealed everything it knows and does, it would in the near term, wreak embarrassment and economic damage on some parties, but in the longer term would help us craft a better country.

By analogy, nobody would keep money at a bank that couldn't be audited. Why would you entrust your society's core values of privacy to a completely opaque government entity having no independent oversight?

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#204

Post by infinotize »

lorendsr wrote: post #27
andrewcooke wrote: post #6

The NSA is not a law enforcement agency. I am not one either. But I still have to obey the law. Maybe that's not what's implied by that statement? But if not, what on earth is meant (more exactly, what was the author's intent in saying something that seems obvious and irrelevant if taken at face value; what am I expected to infer?)?

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.

A judge that is being presented cherry-picked information from the NSA, and who has no one presenting an opposing argument.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#205

Post by shitgoose »

dmfdmf wrote: post #13

Translation: Trust us, we are the good guys. This blog post does nothing to answer the fundamental questions that the Snowden leaks have raised. This man basically argues that, with few exceptions, everyone that works for the NSA is a true American and a patriot who only has your interests at heart and what is a little spying amongst friends anyway. Follow that with some scary hints about cyber war with nuclear respo…

"I'd say the terrorists have won."

There is no such thing as 'terrorists'. It is wrong to imagine that there is a group of evil doers [I am an ESL and this expression always cracks me open:)] that is (1) organized and (2) focused on an agenda to harm United States. If you think so then you fell victim of the greatest fallacy pulled by the government.

The deterioration of your way of life is not due to some struggle with imaginary bad people, but due to the evolution of your government, which is becoming more fat, arrogant, detached from reality and self-centric. NSA is a natural spin in such evolution, where you transform from Huxley's Brave New World to an outright 1984.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#206

Post by shitgoose »

csandreasen wrote: post #201
ytadesse wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? An intelligence officer is exactly the type of person who wouldn't "appear to be in a position where his continued employment with the government would be an issue" while actually still being a government employee. Who's to say that he isn't still working with the NSA? I'm far from a routine skeptic but c'mon ... This post sounds like a PR message.

Well, theoretically he could still be an intelligence officer. Claiming to be a former NSA employee who got out to start up a mayonnaise company is a frankly strange and unusually high-profile cover to work under. Maybe someone can order some mayo from him and tell us if he's legit. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lorensr/payo-paleo-mayo?... Alternately, maybe this is some giant conspiracy to get us to buy NSA-sp…

That's what I was thinking - he is a fake and is using NSA to get you to his Mayonnaise. Honestly, those declassified numbers at the bottom of his post do sound made up.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#207

Post by mpyne »

Peaker wrote: post #190
mpyne wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The mental leap here is subtle, but substantial. Since I have been told I can't use US selectors , I assume the system enforces this. As such, US citizens have nothing to worry about. For the life of me I cannot figure out why people refuse to accept the concept of training and policy as being relevant to proper civil liberties safeguards in addition to technical ones. Imagine applying that idea to any other field,…

> Imagine applying that idea to any other field, and keep in mind the unintended consequences The difference from other fields, is that the consequences in other fields are public. If a soldier shoots someone, that someone is dead and can prompt an investigation. If someone in the NSA abuses his powers, it is very likely that nobody will ever know. Or be able to know. No investigation will be triggered, and even if o…

> If someone in the NSA abuses his powers, it is very likely that nobody will ever know.

But this claim is only a concern if an analyst can unilaterally abuse his power and never be caught. Are you saying this type of surveillance capability would then be acceptable if proper accountability and oversight safeguards can be emplaced?

If anything this should be one of the easier things in the world to do, putting audit trails on computerized systems is hardly "pro league" stuff.

But either way, you say that the consequences will at least be public in other scenarios. But that's not really true either. People get shot every day in this country; how do you know that any given shooting wasn't from a soldier? How do you know when the government lets a contract that they actually fully complied with the Federal Acquisition Regulations? How do you know that when a Congressman votes against his normal voting habits, whether that vote was due to his conscience or due to someone else's wallet? How do you know that when the NSF gives one scientist a grant and refuses another, that it was done in the public interest?

You don't know any of this, as a rule, and yet many of those are much more impactful on the average citizen, even if we assume the existence of lapses in oversight.

As far as I can tell with government IT, your data will always be at more risk of being leaked to cybercriminals via hacking or stupidity (the latter has happened to me already!), than be at risk of being looked at by a rogue NSA agent.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#208

Post by shitgoose »

secthrowaway wrote: post #187
secthrowaway wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

md224: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6911261 > Anyone who defends the NSA on the grounds that it only targets those who are worthy of targeting needs to convince me that another COINTELPRO will never happen. I would actually welcome such an argument, since it would make me feel a whole lot better about this. You raise a very good point. I don't think there are many in the IC who would have a problem with more…

pera: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6911100 > Really? why should anyone trust in anything coming from the NSA when you are systematically lying again and again? why should we listen to anything you say when historically, part of your strategy is to try to influence the PoV of society || specifics groups? OP is not the NSA. OP was an employee for a couple years and can only comment about what he specifically kn…

Another NSA muppet to the rescue. First one was a geek - easy to beat up. It was pretty quickly escalated to someone from PR dept - a fact twisting arrogant smooth talker. You guys are pathetic and frightening. Better stay quiet if you don't want people to hate you even more.

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#209

Post by aet »

eliteraspberrie wrote: post #170
sedev wrote: post #55

This reads like it was penned by someone who's never heard of the Stanford Prison experiment or Milgram's research. When I read "I have a very high opinion of my former coworkers ... NSA employees are the law-abiding type ... You take a long automated psych test that flags troubling personality traits," I take away "the NSA is full of the kind of person who won't look at the big picture, who will follow orders withou…

I take away "the NSA is full of the kind of person who won't look at the big picture, who will follow orders without exercising critical thinking, and who can be counted upon to be a Good German." That is exactly right. Employees of intelligence agencies are selected primarily for loyalty, not critical thinking. Most people find that hard to believe, especially those inside who tend to have a very high opinion of the…

How do you know this?

Re: The NSA: An Inside View

#210

Post by timdiggerm »

typon wrote: post #154
timdiggerm wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think the US (& friends) is the only one doing (or at least trying) to do this?

"Other people are committing unethical acts, therefore it is ok for me to do the same"

People seem to take the view that if the US stops surveillance, then they'll be truly free.
Post reply on HN