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

New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

spiegel.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 295 posts

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#261

Post by dreamfactory2 »

Rapzid wrote: post #162
pa7ch wrote: post #30

Looking at the comments in support of the NSA here makes me suspect an astroturfing campaign is happening. Edit: I should add that my suspicion came from noticing that the vast majority of the comments when this was first posted seemed aligned in favor of the NSA's mission. It wasn't the presence of pro-NSA comments that was interesting but rather that these opinions were the overwhelming majority. This is, of course…

I've been reading the comments and it looks like typical political bickering. People have been made so polarized on these issues by propaganda, astroturfing, the two party system, mainstream media, and etc. that they can't have a conversation about these topics without going for the throat. Shockingly, or not so shockingly, even on Hacker News we can not seem to have constructive conversations about this stuff.

Job done I guess

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#262

Post by frabcus »

Animats wrote: post #25

Everything at the lowest levels needs to be tightened up now. Buffer overflows in trusted code have to go. This means getting rid of the languages with buffer overflow problems. Mostly C and C++. Fortunately we have Go and Rust, plus all the semi-interpreted languages, now, and can do it. We need something that runs Docker-like containers and, all the way down the bare metal, has no unsafe code. We need dumber server…

I agree - I've just made a simple promise pledge, as a ceremony to commit to not using C/C++ for new projects: http://www.flourish.org/promise/

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#263

Post by dang »

diminoten wrote: post #158
rhizome wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well you don't have to be rude about it.

I think your attitude deserves the response I gave, if not something much harsher. You kill intellectual debate.

Please don't make comments like this or be personally rude on Hacker News. Even when you're sure you're right, it harms the site for everyone. That's why it's against the rules:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#264

Post by wfo »

whoopdedo wrote: post #130
elwin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try looking at the comments from a different angle. Instead of grouping them into "pro-NSA" and "anti-NSA" categories, try checking for technical ignorance. Look for ideas about cyberwarfare based on bad analogies with real warfare. Look for a mindset that puts winning an arms race first and never considers ethical implications. Look for vague statements about protecting or harming America that don't explain whether…

If I were being paid to influence a debate, especially being paid by the U.S. Government, the first thing I do is lots and lots of research. The easiest way to discredit someone is to point out technical ignorance in their argument. So I'd make my point technically sound on all points. I'd research the counter-argument so I have rebuttals to every knee-jerk response the amateurs on the internet will toss at me. I'd r…

Theoretically, my goal wouldn't be to influence debate. It would be to find places where thoughtful individuals discuss ideas like this that have an anti-current-government-position bent, and not put forth well reasoned thoughtful arguments. Instead I'd just throw out, en masse, the same tired fearmongering comments, surveillence apologist comments, accuse snowden of being a traitor, anything that would make the pro-democracy elements of this site feel like they are in the minority, or unwelcome. Then they leave, or comment less. Movement destroyed. A slew of garbage one liners about protecting freedom or trusting the secret ultra-powerful decision makers and all of a sudden anyone who has anything intelligent to say feels like, "why bother. This isn't the place for me, obviously. Maybe noone agrees with me."

Actually changing someone's mind through argument is almost impossible. On the internet I'd say it is impossible. So don't change minds, just make the people who disagree with you feel like the whole world is against them when actually they're in the majority.

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#265

Post by AnthonyMouse »

diminoten wrote: post #204
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an actual answer to that question? Because it seems like a bad plan to spend trillions of dollars on something if you can't even show that it works.

Show to who? You?

If by "me" you mean "the voters" then yes of course. What was that Russian proverb Ronald Regan was always so found of? Trust but verify? The verify part is very, very important.

Blind trust with no accountability is totally insane. There has to come a point, during the lives of the people who have to be held accountable for what they've done, that what they've done comes to light. Or how do you propose we hold them to account?

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#266

Post by CyberDildonics »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #255
tacoman wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read this post a dozen times. As a sysadmin for a sizable ISP in a non-US/UK country, the Belgacom story has haunted me. Is this the first time you've talked about it?

My story isn't about me. It's a hypothetical based on things that have actually been done to someone else.

So the whole thing is a lie? Who was it done to?

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#267

Post by [deleted] »

woah wrote: post #250
thefreeman wrote: post #172

The NSA should just leak documents showing all of the other governments doing this stuff so we can move on from the Anti US/UK circle jerk. Seriously if you think your government hasn't invested serious time and money in digital subterfuge you are living in a dream world and need to wake up.

Classic straw man. Many of the documents leaked have shown that our allies are doing the same, usually with the NSA's help. Of non U.S. allies most countries are too small to have serious programs, or are plainly doing much worse. I suppose this is some sort of perverse defense of the NSA, but the fact is that luckily most people would like to hold their government to a higher standard, instead of saying "the other g…

[deleted]

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#268

Post by thefreeman »

hengheng wrote: post #92
fidotron wrote: post #16

To be fair here, the NSA should very well be doing these things, for the purpose of attacking other states. The reason is very clear as the Russian attacks on Estonia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_cyberattacks_on_Estonia ) demonstrate a clear need for defensive capability in this area, and where you have defence you end up needing offence. This persistent confusion between legitimate NSA operations such as pre…

So I happen to be German, and obviously I don't have a say in what commands you guys give to your own secret services. But since this appeared in a German magazine, allow me to say this: given the track record of how you treat your alleged "allies", I don't feel comfortable seeing these developments. And I wouldn't ever trust anybody with these powers, least the nsa or even the US government. These people are still t…

Your government is practically telling you that they are doing the same thing. What do you think "that is their job" means?

I can't believe it is more likely to you that your government is rolling over and "letting the NSA gain world domination", versus your government is trying to downplay it because they know they may one day be caught in exactly the same situation.

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#269

Post by mpyne »

hackuser wrote: post #80
jallmann wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having offensive capabilities and actually utilizing such capabilities are two different things. You can acknowledge the need for the former alongside the dangers of the latter, just as you would with any standing military.

> Having offensive capabilities and actually utilizing such capabilities are two different things. You can acknowledge the need for the former alongside the dangers of the latter, just as you would with any standing military. In information warfare, waiting until conflict begins is too late. The information you collect and systems you exploit prepare you for the conflict. For example, country A wants to know about co…

This is very true, but that still leaves a significant gap between what you're talking about (military/strategic intelligence enabled by network operations) and an actual military campaign conducted against adversary networks.

Both may well need similar capabilities but we can't tell the ability of an agency to engage in "cyberwar" just from their activities in "cyber espionage".

Re: New Snowden Docs Indicate Scope of NSA Preparations for Cyber Battle

#270

Post by dTal »

TheOsiris wrote: post #26
Afforess wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I think the Snowden revelations have harmed the NSA's reputation to the point where most people on HN just assume NSA is a bond-level villain. The NSA serves a purpose, they are meant to be prepared offensively and defensively for the USA's security, which includes the internet. I have no problems with the NSA's purpose and would prefer they continue to exist and prepare against threats to the country. I do b…

precisely, and this is why I'm starting to think that snowden has - at least - caused as much harm as good by his revelations. if he had stopped at revealing the domestic surveillance he would be an undisputed hero/patriot. but with all of these unnecessary leaks that does nothing but harm to national interest I can understand how others might view him otherwise.

Specifically which leaks harmed "national interest" without benefit to the public? I ask non-rhetorically, as GCHQ at least have shown themselves not to be above "leaking" carefully selected titbits and attributing them to Snowden, just to muddy the debate:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/exclusive-uks-...

and the Guardian's "haha what":

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/23/uk-gove...

Note that this "leak", as well as NOT coming from Snowden, isn't really in the domestic public interest, is an activity that a far larger percentage of people would support, and presumably is already known by the target anyway. The clear intent is to make people read the article and go "huh, this Snowden ballyhoo is very overblown". I wonder why the so-called "Independent" played along.

Post reply on HN