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

N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 147 posts

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#71

Post by nl »

VladRussian2 wrote: post #65
wmf wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US manufacturers sold pre-bugged equipment to the eastern bloc during the cold war, so why not now?

Today it is just a well publicly known feature of modern Intel CPU (officially it is stated to be disabled on some CPUs :) http://www.realvnc.com/products/viewerplus/ "Computers with particular Intel® Core™ vPro™ processors enjoy the benefit of a VNC-compatible Server embedded directly onto the chip, enabling permanent remote access and control. A RealVNC collaboration with Intel's ground-breaking hardware has produc…

well publicly known feature

I sure didn't know about it, and wish I did. I'd love to be able to use it!

Is there any easy way to make this work (and to check if your computer supports it)?

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#72

Post by redacted »

melling wrote: post #24
tcdent wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's to say that American intelligence gathering is on the right 'side'? Why should members of 'foreign' countries be held to a different standard?

Can we get a Politics tab on the HN bar so we can filter the endless political debates? This should make everyone happy?

news.ycombinator.com/y/politics

news.ycombinator.com/y/programming

news.ycombinator.com/y/startups

Subcombinators :-)

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#73

Post by malandrew »

snowwrestler wrote: post #61
lancewiggs wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The USA has diplomatic relations with foreign countries based on trust. They also trade with those foreign countries - and that international trade is what makes the economy and our lifestyles work. Targeting "all foreigners" destroys trust that foreigners have in the USA system for trade and diplomacy, lowering the impact of the state on both.

Comments like this make me think that maybe all the "acting naive about foreign affairs, diplomacy, and statecraft" is not actually acting. In the entire human history of diplomatic relations, nations have always attempted to spy on one another. Diplomatic relations are not based on trust, they are based on shared beliefs, interests, and goals.

Personally, I'd like to think that I live in a country that is above accepting such clandestine activities against its own citizens, allies and the citizens of its allies as the status quo.

This is not such a naïve viewpoint as you may think since I would expect it to be the average of the viewpoints that many Americans held about its own government up until a year or so ago. To most Americans, a year ago the NSA didn't spy on US citizens, not did it eavesdrop on the communications of the leaders of its own allies.

If you asked the typical American a year ago if s/he believes that their government spies on the leaders of our allies like Angela Merkel, you'd probably get an overwhelming negative response. If you continued your line of questioning and asked if it is acceptable to for the US government to do so, you'd probably get mixed responses. If you then went on to ask if it would be acceptable for the German government to spy on president Obama and other US politicians, you'd probably get a reaction where US citizens would consider that an act of war.

The truth is that many US citizens hold very very very different opinions of what is acceptable than those in the intelligence community.

I don't know about you, but the simple fact that such a wide disconnect exists between what citizens collectively think about how their government is operating and how it actually is operating is a fundamental failure of how our democracy currently functions. Leaders in a democracy should have a legal obligation to work to keep their constituents as best informed of how they are actually doing their jobs and attempts to hide or be less than honest about their activities should be viewed as attempts to subvert democracy. Anything otherwise, prevents I, Joe Q. Citizen, from honestly and effectively exercising my right to vote. If such policies mean non-American leaders will have a greater insight into how our politicians are acting in foreign policy negotiations than our leaders have about those non-American leaders are acting, that is the cost of being more ethical. Ideally that disadvantage is made up for in the long term by establishing a norm of greater ethics that those leader's citizens expect them to meet.

If a citizen votes based on lies and misinformation, are they really participating in a democracy?

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#74

Post by [deleted] »

conductor wrote: post #20
staunch wrote: post #2

This sounds like a non-issue to me. Any person on this site could create little USB devices for stealing data. It's nothing special or new. I thought I was going to hear that they're light years beyond Tempest[1] or something. Feels good to finally hear an NSA story that doesn't depress me. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempest_(codename)

It can be inserted by a manufacturer, as mentioned in the article. A little chip (inside the motherboard/CPU/hard disk/graphic card) with a radio module that can receive radio signals and write the received data directly into hard disk and/or RAM or read bytes from the hard disk and/or RAM and/or graphic card and transmit it back.

[deleted]

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#75

Post by sroerick »

codex wrote: post #37

This is another example of how Snowden has compromised national security by leaking secret information that has nothing to do with American metadata and everything to do with the NSA's charter and legal mission.

What do you think about Greenwald's opinion that it's the goal of the NSA to intercept and record all information or communications?

If this is true, than releasing this information may be seen in a different context.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#76

Post by malandrew »

codex wrote: post #37

This is another example of how Snowden has compromised national security by leaking secret information that has nothing to do with American metadata and everything to do with the NSA's charter and legal mission.

Until we have true US citizen oversight over the NSA activities to make sure that they are acting purely in a way that is aligned with its charter and legal mission, all this information about its capability also compromises its ability to carry out a perfect tyranny.

I think most US citizens would be okay with affording the NSA rights to secrecy if those in the NSA had shown themselves to be exemplary defenders of the US Constitution.

Instead, they have demonstrated themselves as the most formidable opponents to the US Constitution, and more specifically the Bill of Rights. Our national security means nothing if the principles upon which the nation is founded are being debased wholesale. The US without the Constitution is not a nation, since the Constitution is the foundation of the shared history and government of the 330 million people that call themselves Americans.

An NSA that does not respect the Constitution is the greatest existential threat to national security this country has faced. An organization with the capabilities of the NSA with no real oversight can unilaterally subvert even the healthiest democracy.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#77

Post by eru »

IBM wrote: post #36
eru wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if the foreignerns don't want to spied up on? Or do they count for less?

What is the use of acting naive about foreign affairs, diplomacy, and statecraft? Are you really suggesting that your country's intelligence service doesn't attempt to do the same?

But why be so naive about domestic spying, then?

If the NSA can commit crimes abroad, they can commit crimes at home.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#78

Post by eru »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #28
conductor wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be inserted by a manufacturer, as mentioned in the article. A little chip (inside the motherboard/CPU/hard disk/graphic card) with a radio module that can receive radio signals and write the received data directly into hard disk and/or RAM or read bytes from the hard disk and/or RAM and/or graphic card and transmit it back.

Interestingly, this would also seem to have the potential to defeat encryption, since it directly accesses working memory. This is why I have always been cautious about those who advocate personal cryptography as a privacy solution. We need clear laws, first and foremost, to reign them in. Otherwise, we are effectively saying that if they can get it (i.e. decrypt it), it is fair game. Cat-and-mouse is not a game we w…

Laws are not going to protect people from the NSA. Especially laws that only apply to a miniscule fraction of the population (ie the fraction of the population that lives in the USA). Spy agencies are a global menace.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#80

Post by baddox »

snowwrestler wrote: post #61
lancewiggs wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The USA has diplomatic relations with foreign countries based on trust. They also trade with those foreign countries - and that international trade is what makes the economy and our lifestyles work. Targeting "all foreigners" destroys trust that foreigners have in the USA system for trade and diplomacy, lowering the impact of the state on both.

Comments like this make me think that maybe all the "acting naive about foreign affairs, diplomacy, and statecraft" is not actually acting. In the entire human history of diplomatic relations, nations have always attempted to spy on one another. Diplomatic relations are not based on trust, they are based on shared beliefs, interests, and goals.

> In the entire human history of diplomatic relations, nations have always attempted to spy on one another.

Yes, and it's all bad. I don't see what's naive, or even controversial, about this.

Post reply on HN