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

Interview with Edward Snowden

spiegel.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 168 posts

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#151

Post by lern_too_spel »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #150
lern_too_spel wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He exposed numerous illegal hacks done by the NSA on Hong Kong civilians These hacks are not illegal. I'm flabbergasted that you would think they were. In addition to those legal hacks on Hong Kong infrastructure, he also exposed legal hacks on mainland Chinese infrastructure. Americans already know the government is doing these things. They do not need to know the details of which systems were compromised and when…

>The small sample data suggests secret and illegal NSA attacks on Hong Kong computers... From your source. You're flabbergasted that I think the illegal programs you brought up were illegal.

What law are they breaking? I'm flabbergasted that you believe something is illegal just because Snowden says it is, when it is so obviously incorrect.

Do you also believe Snowden's ridiculous description of PRISM? That bumbling illiterate was so proud of finding a data integration project between the FBI and the NSA that he asked The Washington Post to publish the description in full while ranting about "omniscient, automatic, mass surveillance" and warned the Post's reporter melodramatically that the government would kill the reporter if he didn't publish quickly.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#152

Post by boomboomsubban »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #151
boomboomsubban wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The small sample data suggests secret and illegal NSA attacks on Hong Kong computers... From your source. You're flabbergasted that I think the illegal programs you brought up were illegal.

What law are they breaking? I'm flabbergasted that you believe something is illegal just because Snowden says it is, when it is so obviously incorrect. Do you also believe Snowden's ridiculous description of PRISM? That bumbling illiterate was so proud of finding a data integration project between the FBI and the NSA that he asked The Washington Post to publish the description in full while ranting about "omniscient,…

They're breaking the CFAA, hacking foreign computers is still illegal in most situations. The NSA isn't immune to the law, it's just unlikely to be prosecuted m

So you think Snowden is a bumbling idiot yet he somehow faked millions of files detailing the NSA's misdeeds? I hope you're acting independently, it's far too depressing to think that you are a paid troll.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#153

Post by lern_too_spel »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #152
lern_too_spel wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What law are they breaking? I'm flabbergasted that you believe something is illegal just because Snowden says it is, when it is so obviously incorrect. Do you also believe Snowden's ridiculous description of PRISM? That bumbling illiterate was so proud of finding a data integration project between the FBI and the NSA that he asked The Washington Post to publish the description in full while ranting about "omniscient,…

They're breaking the CFAA, hacking foreign computers is still illegal in most situations. The NSA isn't immune to the law, it's just unlikely to be prosecuted m So you think Snowden is a bumbling idiot yet he somehow faked millions of files detailing the NSA's misdeeds? I hope you're acting independently, it's far too depressing to think that you are a paid troll.

> They're breaking the CFAA

CFAA – 18 USC 1030(f) explicitly allows this. Do you want to try again?

> So you think Snowden is a bumbling idiot yet he somehow faked millions of files detailing the NSA's misdeeds?

Who said he faked the files? This is the second time you have put words into my mouth. I have always said that the files are genuine and that Snowden did not understand them because he has the reading level and the technical ability of an elementary school student.

> I hope you're acting independently, it's far too depressing to think that you are a paid troll.

I know people who implemented the systems at the dot coms that send information to the FBI in the PRISM slides. I have laughed at Snowden's ridiculous misinterpretation of those slides for the past six years. It is a source of continuing amusement that there remain some people who should know better that still believe Snowden's interpretation.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#154

Post by boomboomsubban »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #153
boomboomsubban wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're breaking the CFAA, hacking foreign computers is still illegal in most situations. The NSA isn't immune to the law, it's just unlikely to be prosecuted m So you think Snowden is a bumbling idiot yet he somehow faked millions of files detailing the NSA's misdeeds? I hope you're acting independently, it's far too depressing to think that you are a paid troll.

> They're breaking the CFAA CFAA – 18 USC 1030(f) explicitly allows this. Do you want to try again? > So you think Snowden is a bumbling idiot yet he somehow faked millions of files detailing the NSA's misdeeds? Who said he faked the files? This is the second time you have put words into my mouth. I have always said that the files are genuine and that Snowden did not understand them because he has the reading level a…

>CFAA – 18 USC 1030(f) explicitly allows this.

Unless yoy can produce the lawful authorization given to access these computers, that subsection does not permit their actions.

>Snowden did not understand them because he has the reading level and the technical ability of an elementary school student.

So your argument is that the documents he revealed don't detail a mass surveillance program. Would never have guessed that.

>I know people who implemented the systems at the dot coms that send information to the FBI in the PRISM slides

All the dot coms listed by PRISM deny being a part of such a program. If you're legit, you're probably burning bridges here.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#155

Post by lern_too_spel »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #154
lern_too_spel wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're breaking the CFAA CFAA – 18 USC 1030(f) explicitly allows this. Do you want to try again? > So you think Snowden is a bumbling idiot yet he somehow faked millions of files detailing the NSA's misdeeds? Who said he faked the files? This is the second time you have put words into my mouth. I have always said that the files are genuine and that Snowden did not understand them because he has the reading level a…

>CFAA – 18 USC 1030(f) explicitly allows this. Unless yoy can produce the lawful authorization given to access these computers, that subsection does not permit their actions. >Snowden did not understand them because he has the reading level and the technical ability of an elementary school student. So your argument is that the documents he revealed don't detail a mass surveillance program. Would never have guessed th…

> Unless yoy can produce the lawful authorization given to access these computers, that subsection does not permit their actions.

The NSA is indeed authorized to break into communications systems abroad. That is half of its charter.

> So your argument is that the documents he revealed don't detail a mass surveillance program

My argument is that PRISM, which he was so excited to tell everyone about, is not a mass surveillance program as he had claimed. The closest thing to a mass surveillance program in the US that he leaked (and the only illegal NSA program in his leaks) was phone metadata collection, but the restrictions on how that data could be queried makes calling it mass surveillance a bit of a stretch.

> All the dot coms listed by PRISM deny being a part of such a program.

They aren't a part of PRISM — the slides very clearly show them to be outside of PRISM, which Snowden and Greenwald were too stupid to understand. They integrate with the FBI (and EU law enforcement, etc.) to transfer data for specific accounts under court-ordered surveillance. The slides show that PRISM is an NSA data ingestion system to get the FBI's data into the NSA's search indices. The only two organizations involved in implementing that are the NSA and the FBI.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#156

Post by boomboomsubban »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #155
boomboomsubban wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>CFAA – 18 USC 1030(f) explicitly allows this. Unless yoy can produce the lawful authorization given to access these computers, that subsection does not permit their actions. >Snowden did not understand them because he has the reading level and the technical ability of an elementary school student. So your argument is that the documents he revealed don't detail a mass surveillance program. Would never have guessed th…

> Unless yoy can produce the lawful authorization given to access these computers, that subsection does not permit their actions. The NSA is indeed authorized to break into communications systems abroad. That is half of its charter. > So your argument is that the documents he revealed don't detail a mass surveillance program My argument is that PRISM, which he was so excited to tell everyone about, is not a mass surv…

>The NSA is indeed authorized to break into communications systems abroad. That is half of its charter.

The NSA does not have carte blanche to infiltrate any computer without question.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#157

Post by lern_too_spel »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #156
lern_too_spel wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unless yoy can produce the lawful authorization given to access these computers, that subsection does not permit their actions. The NSA is indeed authorized to break into communications systems abroad. That is half of its charter. > So your argument is that the documents he revealed don't detail a mass surveillance program My argument is that PRISM, which he was so excited to tell everyone about, is not a mass surv…

>The NSA is indeed authorized to break into communications systems abroad. That is half of its charter. The NSA does not have carte blanche to infiltrate any computer without question.

You are putting words in my mouth again. They cannot hack domestic infrastructure. They can infiltrate foreign infrastructure belonging to foreigners if it is helpful for national security (a very low bar because any networked computer can act as a jumping off point to attack another).

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#158

Post by seppin »

ben_w wrote: post #146
seppin wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facts getting downvoted. This place has become Reddit with even more blind arrogance. Myth 2: The men and women who work for the CIA are spies and agents Citizens who work for the CIA are officers – not agents or spies. All employees, from operations officers, to analysts, to librarians and public affairs, are considered CIA officers. So, who is a CIA agent? Our operations officers recruit well-placed human assets wi…

If, in your own words, “I don't think the Kremlin has much use for him anymore tbh”, then the definition you quoted doesn’t fit him being an agent.

> “I don't think the Kremlin has much use for him anymore tbh"

That doesn't mean they'll just let him leave.

> definition you quoted doesn’t fit him being an agent.

A foreign asset is an agent. FBI calls their employees "agents", the intel community does not.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#159

Post by boomboomsubban »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #157
boomboomsubban wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The NSA is indeed authorized to break into communications systems abroad. That is half of its charter. The NSA does not have carte blanche to infiltrate any computer without question.

You are putting words in my mouth again. They cannot hack domestic infrastructure. They can infiltrate foreign infrastructure belonging to foreigners if it is helpful for national security (a very low bar because any networked computer can act as a jumping off point to attack another).

You still have to prove both that this was helpful to national security and that no US citizens were part of the target, and you need to do so for every hack done. Otherwise it's illegal.

Re: Interview with Edward Snowden

#160

Post by lern_too_spel »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #159
lern_too_spel wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are putting words in my mouth again. They cannot hack domestic infrastructure. They can infiltrate foreign infrastructure belonging to foreigners if it is helpful for national security (a very low bar because any networked computer can act as a jumping off point to attack another).

You still have to prove both that this was helpful to national security and that no US citizens were part of the target, and you need to do so for every hack done. Otherwise it's illegal.

The document doesn't say that any US citizens' data was taken. It just says that the NSA has access to those Chinese computer systems. This is not illegal. You would think that if Snowden had information about actually illegal things the NSA did with that access, that would show up in the giant stash of documents he took, but no such document has appeared.
Post reply on HN