Live data from Hacker News

The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

news.yahoo.com

181–190 of 261 posts

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#181
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Makes a lot of sense to me that each department handles their own law enforcement, and can set the priorities they prefer. One centralized Federal Police Department would be a single point of failure and bureaucratic nightmare. Imagine if there were not State and local police departments. Just the FBI managing every shoplifting arrest in the country.

Lots of countries do just that though, without the crazy specific separation and specialisation that America does.

Which ones and how big are they?

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agency for Global Media has their own law enforcement that investigates threats against the agency and it’s personnel. This ranges from securing HQ against protests to investigating what happens to broadcast infrastructure in war zones like Afghanistan to securing classified information.

I chose a random agency without checking what exactly they do. The specific agencies I mentioned are irrelevant to the actual points I was making. We don't need every single agency to handle investigating threats to themself. It just doesn't make financial or practical sense. We can use the FBI, Secret Service, DHS, etc to deal with protecting the entire government and their employees. This will eliminate duplication…

We don't need more centralization. That just puts all the spoils in terms of getting corrupt individuals in positions of influence in one basket. Keeping agencies and jurisdictions divided keeps people specialized, limits the spread of taint, and ensures any that does take root is limited in scope; which is a good thing. Last thing we need is a monolithic law enforcement agency.

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does incompetence and failure bear on intent? I don't think that usually flies in court.

Is it remotely plausible to believe a group of unarmed protestors were seriously attempting to gain control over the most powerful superpower the world has ever seen with their barehands? This narrative strains credulity, counselor.

It's plausible that it's what some people were personally thinking (or a better word might be "LARPing"). But for the reasons you point out, it's not realistic to suggest that the loftiness of the goal implies the danger was historically-serious, or requiring some kind of revolutionary increase of law enforcement (beyond handling protests at the capital more wisely next time).

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#184
post #100

This is a tough issue for a government. We do have crazies out there and we do need to investigate potential dangerous groups and individuals and reel them in before they do something crazy. On my FB feed I have seen friends and friends of friends call for armed revolt many times over the past few years. Most all of them are blowing steam and many are in their 60s or older and couldn't run a block in gym shorts, and…

It doesn't need to be monitored. It needs to be deescalated. The left wants to believe its blameless, but there's a massive portion of America that, per their believe foundation, disagrees with the policies they are putting in place. We live in a Democracy; the only "right" way forward is the one we all agree with, and we can't agree on anything right now.

I don't know how to deescalate it, but its beginning to feel like the most sensible solution is transferring significantly more resources and power to the States (which is precisely how our country was founded). Many states do, internally, have division, but broadly speaking California would be happier to run itself more independently of Donald Trump, as much as Mississippi would be happier to run itself more independently of Joe Biden.

It doesn't feel like this is optional; some amount of fractionalization will happen, possibly in four years, possibly in fifty, but it is inevitable. The choice in front of us is to either, ease ourselves into it using the democratic framework we have in place by significantly reducing the power of the executive branch and transferring more tax-originating resources from the federal to state & country levels, or; some form of civil war.

And, I beg you, don't form this idea of "civil war" in your mind to resemble the first one; it won't. For all the ugliness of our first Civil War, our second will be far uglier. One possibility may take the form of a second Trump-like presidency destroying the Federal faith of left-leaning states, causing the west coast to secede. Another; domestic terrorism, cyber warfare, untraceable and unstoppable flash attacks on critical infrastructure such as electricity and water, splinter military groups.

As left-leaning as I may be, we can't come out of the Trump presidency and Biden election thinking all of this is over. We can't ban Parler from AWS then wash our hands clean and say its a job well done. This rage is real, its everywhere, and there are four hundred million guns owned by civilians in America [1]. Gun control? A fairy tale. Suppression of dissenting speech? Someone didn't read 1984, or the Constitution. The only solution is to fractionalize; if people feel anger at the President, the solution isn't to install a new President, it's to make the position of the President one that isn't worthy of Anger.

The scariest part about our future as a country lies in the reality that this will never happen. We are driving full speed toward a civil war, or worse, and the immutable system we've built won't allow us to do what is necessary to avoid it.

[1] https://wamu.org/story/20/09/18/how-many-people-in-the-u-s-o...

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because analyzing all of social media with efficiency and effectively is really hard.

It implies that only an extremely highly paid developer can write efficient code which I think just isn't true.

I've been programming for 15 years and worked at firms of all sizes and payscale, I see a direct correlation between the two

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a dumb argument because they were at least trying to IMPLEMENT A COUP. It seems pretty clear to me that they would have assaulted and killed representatives if they would have gotten the chance which they very nearly did. Also, don't call them "protestors". The nicest term I can think of for them would be rebels since they were in open rebellion to the United States. Some people at the capital that day were p…

Funny "coup" where none of the plotters were armed.

No, not really. Quite a few successful coups have been essentially bloodless and relied on a combination of surprise and bluff. Napoleon's actual seizure of power was disorganized to put it mildly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_of_18_Brumaire

Also, there are charges pending against people who had a stash of firearms in a hotel in Virginia, just across the Potomac, and planned to bring them over at a later stage. Firearms are largely banned in DC so the idea was to take over the Congress first and then establish a defensive perimeter.

Now, I didn't say it was a good plan.

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#187

Pretty much any federal agency you have heard of has an investigative dept that employs federal special agents. These are law enforcement roles with the same training, authority, and responsibilities as investigative agents in the FBI, etc. They were created to meet the specific law enforcement needs of each agency. Dept of Education agents investigate misuse of Dept of Education funds, for example. The Postal Inspec…

It does seem like they should centralize this stuff though... virtually every nationwide-jurisdiction agency will want to monitor social media posts so you would think they would centralize it in one department rather than duplicating effort. Also the argument can be made that spending too much time enforcing other agencies' laws is not spending the budget the way Congress intended.

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#188

Pretty much any federal agency you have heard of has an investigative dept that employs federal special agents. These are law enforcement roles with the same training, authority, and responsibilities as investigative agents in the FBI, etc. They were created to meet the specific law enforcement needs of each agency. Dept of Education agents investigate misuse of Dept of Education funds, for example. The Postal Inspec…

> I will say that personally I have fewer concerns about programs to monitor public content on the Internet, than programs that seek to access, monitor, and store content that people intended to be privately communicated to other people. This distinction is disappearing quickly in the current Internet, where conversations are increasingly company-mediated and facilitated. There's no such thing as a "private" conversa…

WhatsApp (which is owned by Facebook) employs end-to-end encryption between individuals for its 1on1 and group conversations, and no one else in the world besides those parties (or possibly backup companies those parties decide to use) has access to the message contents that WhatsApp says are protected by E2EE. It uses the Signal Protocol.

Facebook has started efforts to roll out end-to-end encryption for its Messenger as well, using the same protocol as WhatsApp, which Signal blogged about: https://signal.org/blog/facebook-messenger/#:~:text=Facebook....

Posts and other content on your "wall" or "timeline" are intended to be relatively public, according to whatever privacy settings you have set up on your account, and won't be similarly encrypted; but the content will only be available to the people that you allow to see your account and post. That's more of a permission set described by a database like you describe. But you can share different posts with different groups of people you define; or participate in public or private/secret/invite only groups where content is only accessibly by those people.

Yes, that content would be accessible as plaintext by certain FB employees, just like your Gmail account's contents could be accessed by certain employees at Google. However, there are very strict policies around not accessing user content at FB by employees unless required for the function of the employee's job (e.g. investigating spamming, child pornography, and other abuse like that I would imagine; or assisting law enforcement with subpoenas or court orders for the content).

Notably WhatsApp has no ability to hand over message contents between individuals whose conversations are protected by end-to-end encryption even if it receives a court order to do so, because the encryption keys protecting that content truly live only on the user's devices, and the plaintext content never touches WhatsApp servers today. As long as you don't back up your message history outside your device in plaintext (and what WhatsApp stores on the device might be encrypted now too; I'm not sure), the only way for anyone to obtain the message history is to get their hands on your phone and the encryption keys & message history it contains. So if your phone is protected by a strong passcode and a security vendor hasn't found a way to bypass iPhone login security, as long as your iPhone is locked even the US government won't be able to get at your data.

I believe their was a court ruling that passwords to your phone are protected by the 5th Amendment against testifying against yourself, so I don't believe a court can compel you to reveal the phone password, but I'm not up to speed on the current case law. So if you lock your phone before an attacker seizes it, they can't get the contents even if the attacker is a government (unless they're willing to use physical coercion as in XKCD 538 [1], or indirect physical coercion such as ordering revelation of the password under threat of contempt of court, if that's permissible).

WhatsApp is also allowing businesses onto the platform, to use it to communicate with those customers, and some of those conversations may be regularly encrypted, not end-to-end encrypted. Those conversations are displayed differently in the UX of WhatsApp when the conversation begins, to clarify that they're not protected by E2EE. (It's arguably impractical to have real E2EE between a customer and a large business with, e.g., many customer service agents. What would that really mean? I personally think E2EE is most meaningful between individual people who personally know each other, not between people and businesses which are anonymously-defined, constantly-changing groups of people.)

I'm not a spokesperson for any company and these are my own opinions based on what I've read from public news sources.

[1] https://xkcd.com/538/

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#189

Pretty much any federal agency you have heard of has an investigative dept that employs federal special agents. These are law enforcement roles with the same training, authority, and responsibilities as investigative agents in the FBI, etc. They were created to meet the specific law enforcement needs of each agency. Dept of Education agents investigate misuse of Dept of Education funds, for example. The Postal Inspec…

>They were created to meet the specific law enforcement needs of each agency. Dept of Education agents investigate misuse of Dept of Education funds, That's a really charitable way of saying "handle petty stuff that the FBI can't justify spending resources on". Every specialty police department exists for this reason and this reason only. Because the mission is often so petty they wouldn't get any resources if it was…

They can also provide specialized knowledge. Ex. the DOE OIG is going to have nuclear scientists, the HHS OIG or TIGTA is going to have tons of forensic accountants, etc. In the case of Inspector Generals specifically, they also have the mission of investigating internal misconduct within the agency, and they have a relationship where they are independently authorized to act but under ideal circumstances work closely with agency heads to root out corruption and improve efficiency. A lot of what they do is accounting and effectiveness audits that do not fall under law enforcement.

Re: The USPS is running a 'covert' program to monitor Americans' social media posts

#190

Pretty much any federal agency you have heard of has an investigative dept that employs federal special agents. These are law enforcement roles with the same training, authority, and responsibilities as investigative agents in the FBI, etc. They were created to meet the specific law enforcement needs of each agency. Dept of Education agents investigate misuse of Dept of Education funds, for example. The Postal Inspec…

>They were created to meet the specific law enforcement needs of each agency. Dept of Education agents investigate misuse of Dept of Education funds, That's a really charitable way of saying "handle petty stuff that the FBI can't justify spending resources on". Every specialty police department exists for this reason and this reason only. Because the mission is often so petty they wouldn't get any resources if it was…

Wait till you hear about privately-owned company and railroad police departments...
Post reply on HN