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

Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

libroot.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 232 posts

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#201

Post by lern_too_spel »

masfuerte wrote: post #128
sholain wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One cannot just release whatever one wants, and some of the docs should not have been released. There were huge variations in the nature of the content that he released, and this is the problem with the narrative. He's a 'whistle blower' and 'broke the law' at the same time. A lot of people seem to have difficulty with that. Edit: we need better privacy laws and transparency around a lot of things, that said, some st…

I find it very strange that so many people are more exercised by the small crime of Snowden releasing this information than by the large crime of the federal government spying on us all.

Snowden's documents revealed that the federal government wasn't "spying on us all," as had been feared but was in fact paring down domestic data collection and had only one illegal program left (phone metadata collection, which wasn't used for "spying") that was pared down and then shut down soon after. They did reveal a lot of Chinese targets, which Snowden unsuccessful used to try to parlay into Hong Kong asylum.

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#202

Post by lern_too_spel »

timschmidt wrote: post #160
mikeyouse wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately Binney has absolutely lost it and can’t be considered credible.. literally hanging out with Alex Jones and talking about Stolen elections using math a precocious middle schooler could rebut. His pinned Tweet is still referencing a “directed energy weapon” assassination attempt of him by the US Air Force (which took place during the Trump administration, who he was supporting, so apparently some rogue DE…

Every human has ideas and opinions others disagree with. However, as Technical Director and later geopolitical world Technical Director of NSA with over 30 years of SIGINT service, literally no one is in a better position to know about NSA surveillance activities.

He was a middle manager decades ago. Literally most intelligence people are in a better position to know about NSA surveillance activities.

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#203

Post by lern_too_spel »

AstroNutt wrote: post #151
jeffbee wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the correct point of reference, but you are misinterpreting it and I urge you to think about it again. All of the government's facilities put together amount to almost nothing in the data center landscape, therefore it should be quite obvious that they certainly are not equipped to broadly intercept, store, and search "everything".

Why should they when they have access to FAANG? No need for massive data centers.

By access to FAANG, you mean they can issue court orders to surveil specific foreign accounts, right? Because that's what was in Snowden's docs.

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#204

Post by lern_too_spel »

SamDc73 wrote: post #68
psunavy03 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, he violated a trust given to him, he deserves to be in jail, and if he had an ounce of moral character he'd come back and face trial like a man. Unlike the movies there aren't secret death squads out to get him, just a courtroom where he can face the consequences of his actions like an adult. Instead, he's hiding out playing the victim in a country that's actively genociding Ukrainians to a degree beyond anything…

He violated the trust of whom? The government who was violating the trust of the American People? And as for Russia, he didn’t flee there by choice; he got stranded because the U.S. government revoked his passport mid-transit, He was there for a transit and hit final destination was Ecuador ...

He fled to China by choice and gave them plenty of documents about Chinese targets, some of which are in the article we are discussing.

The government wasn't violating the trust of the American people. If you ask about the single illegal domestic data collection program in the leak (phone metadata collection) and how it was used (to find associates of surveilled foreign agents working against the national security of the U.S.), you will find that most people don't care.

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#205

Post by lern_too_spel »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #93
ginush wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He sought revenge after not getting a desired job promotion. There was nothing noble about his intentions, just narcissistic fury with what he, in his narrow world view, saw as unfairness towards himself. I find it amazing how many people have been taken in by the bullshit narrative he concocted about human rights and privacy. So gullible. He helped our adversaries on an immense scale, and even went to live under the…

> even went to live under the protection of one of them. Some patriot he is, gladly embracing the Russian regime. You know that's not true? His passport was cancelled while he was mid-flight and no country would touch him, and he was essentially trapped in an airport until Russia offered asylum. The US effectively sent him to Russia.

He went to China and leaked surveillance targets to the Chinese government. Some of these documents are in the very article we are now discussing.

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#206

Post by timschmidt »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #202
timschmidt wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every human has ideas and opinions others disagree with. However, as Technical Director and later geopolitical world Technical Director of NSA with over 30 years of SIGINT service, literally no one is in a better position to know about NSA surveillance activities.

He was a middle manager decades ago. Literally most intelligence people are in a better position to know about NSA surveillance activities.

"Binney was the agency official responsible for automating much of the NSA’s worldwide monitoring networks."

https://www.wired.com/2012/04/shady-companies-nsa/

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#207

Post by timschmidt »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #203
AstroNutt wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should they when they have access to FAANG? No need for massive data centers.

By access to FAANG, you mean they can issue court orders to surveil specific foreign accounts, right? Because that's what was in Snowden's docs.

"NSA Secretly Tapped Google, Yahoo Data Centers, Report Says"

https://www.networkcomputing.com/data-center-networking/nsa-...

"A striking feature of proceedings at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is that the executive always wins. Between 1979 and 2012—the first thirty-three years of the FISC’s existence—federal agencies submitted 33,900 ex parte requests to the court. The judges denied eleven and granted the rest: a 99.97% rate of approval."

https://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/is-the-foreign-inte...

"The newspaper reported that in "more than a dozen classified rulings, the nation's surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans""

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intellig...

So, by "court order" do you mean secret law and secret trials with a history of always deciding against those who are being surveilled? Because that's what was in Snowden's docs.

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#208

Post by lern_too_spel »

timschmidt wrote: post #207
lern_too_spel wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By access to FAANG, you mean they can issue court orders to surveil specific foreign accounts, right? Because that's what was in Snowden's docs.

"NSA Secretly Tapped Google, Yahoo Data Centers, Report Says" https://www.networkcomputing.com/data-center-networking/nsa-... "A striking feature of proceedings at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is that the executive always wins. Between 1979 and 2012—the first thirty-three years of the FISC’s existence—federal agencies submitted 33,900 ex parte requests to the court. The judges denied eleven and…

> "NSA Secretly Tapped Google, Yahoo Data Centers, Report Says"

This was for extracting email envelope metadata to build a graph of who was contacting whom, a program that Snowden's leaks showed had already been shut down.

> "A striking feature of proceedings at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is that the executive always wins. Between 1979 and 2012—the first thirty-three years of the FISC’s existence—federal agencies submitted 33,900 ex parte requests to the court. The judges denied eleven and granted the rest: a 99.97% rate of approval."

What do you think the approval rate for other court orders is? It's exactly the same.

> "The newspaper reported that in "more than a dozen classified rulings, the nation's surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans"

This reporting was at odds with what the leaked documents said and was later walked back.

> So, by "court order" do you mean secret law and secret trials with a history of always deciding against those who are being surveilled? Because that's what was in Snowden's docs.

That explicitly was not in Snowden's docs. The law is public, and warrants are almost always granted. In this case, as Snowden's docs said, the court orders are for foreigners, living outside the U.S.

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#209

Post by timschmidt »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #208
timschmidt wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"NSA Secretly Tapped Google, Yahoo Data Centers, Report Says" https://www.networkcomputing.com/data-center-networking/nsa-... "A striking feature of proceedings at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is that the executive always wins. Between 1979 and 2012—the first thirty-three years of the FISC’s existence—federal agencies submitted 33,900 ex parte requests to the court. The judges denied eleven and…

> "NSA Secretly Tapped Google, Yahoo Data Centers, Report Says" This was for extracting email envelope metadata to build a graph of who was contacting whom, a program that Snowden's leaks showed had already been shut down. > "A striking feature of proceedings at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is that the executive always wins. Between 1979 and 2012—the first thirty-three years of the FISC’s existe…

> This was for extracting email envelope metadata to build a graph of who was contacting whom, a program that Snowden's leaks showed had already been shut down.

"According to Victor Marchetti, a former special assistant to the deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), a limited hangout is "spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting—sometimes even volunteering—some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout

In fact, NSA's own slide deck, an excerpt of which can be viewed here: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/fiber-optic-... indicate that all Google services including Gmail, Docs, Maps, and others were subject to interception.

Additional NSA slides here: https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/new-slides-reveal-gr... detail email, chat, video, voice, photos, stored data, VoIP, file transfers, video conferencing, notifications, social networking details, and the ever ominous "Special Requests".

> What do you think the approval rate for other court orders is? It's exactly the same.

"Two wrongs make a right" is considered "one of the most common fallacies in Western philosophy".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_wrongs_don%27t_make_a_righ...

> This reporting was at odds with what the leaked documents said and was later walked back.

The linked article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intellig... contains 96 references to reporting from 2004 to 2021 from a wide variety of sources. The word "retraction" does not appear once. Among the cited sources are many examples such as:

A former federal judge who served on a secret court overseeing the National Security Agency's secret surveillance programs said Tuesday the panel is independent but flawed because only the government's side is represented effectively in its deliberations.

"Anyone who has been a judge will tell you a judge needs to hear both sides of a case," said James Robertson, a former federal district judge based in Washington who served on the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court for three years between 2002 and 2005.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130711211028/https://abcnews.g...

Re: Going Through Snowden Documents, Part 1

#210

Post by lern_too_spel »

timschmidt wrote: post #209
lern_too_spel wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "NSA Secretly Tapped Google, Yahoo Data Centers, Report Says" This was for extracting email envelope metadata to build a graph of who was contacting whom, a program that Snowden's leaks showed had already been shut down. > "A striking feature of proceedings at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) is that the executive always wins. Between 1979 and 2012—the first thirty-three years of the FISC’s existe…

> This was for extracting email envelope metadata to build a graph of who was contacting whom, a program that Snowden's leaks showed had already been shut down. "According to Victor Marchetti, a former special assistant to the deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), a limited hangout is "spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrec…

> "According to Victor Marchetti, a former special assistant to the deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), a limited hangout is "spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting—sometimes even volunteering—some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case."

Then why didn't Snowden's doc show any illegal use of that data? Instead, he leaked many things that were perfectly legal as well as which high value targets were being surveilled in China in a transparent and failed attempt to get asylum in Hong Kong.

> "Two wrongs make a right" is considered "one of the most common fallacies in Western philosophy".

You are assuming it's wrong. Investigators aren't going to waste their time writing up court orders that aren't likely to be approved. Instead, we find that criminal defense attorneys rarely challenge the validity of warrants as issued but may challenge whether the warrant was followed.

> "Anyone who has been a judge will tell you a judge needs to hear both sides of a case," said James Robertson, a former federal district judge based in Washington who served on the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court for three years between 2002 and 2005.

You're confusing multiple things here. You're confusing bulk metadata collection, which Robertson opposed, with individual surveillance warrants, which are always done without informing the person being surveilled. There was no opposing side to the bulk metadata collection, which was shut down. There was no record of mass domestic surveillance in Snowden's docs.

Post reply on HN