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

US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 420 posts

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#381

Post by adimitrov »

anigbrowl wrote: post #170
Afforess wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The loss of privacy is massive in comparison to the lives lost to terrorism. More people die each year due to car accidents than have lost their lives to all terrorist attacks on US Soil. If the information that is being gathered is about safety, then why isn't the government isn't creating a massive program to strictly monitor highway speeds, traffic roadways, and increase traffic safety then? Answer: The informatio…

We have such a massive program, according to many; the NTSB is a big bureaucracy and a lot of people consider the whole concept of speed limits and traffic police as a encroachment upon their freedom rather than a reasonable collective decision on how to share transit arteries. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. This seems a rather inappropriate apho…

> This seems a rather inappropriate aphorism, since most people here would very much like to deny the NSA access to information about their phone usage.

So, the people would dream themselves masters of the government agency NSA. Wasn't that what government was supposed to do? Serve the people?

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#382

Post by twoodfin »

intrazoo wrote: post #331
md224 wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a Devil's Advocate position (not necessarily my personal beliefs, so please don't downvote based on disagreement. Just rip it to shreds instead!): The fear of losing privacy to the government is based on the fear that this increased surveillance will be used by the government to smother dissent. This is a valid fear, but has the government yet used surveillance to smother dissent? If you can find a solid examp…

Most my examples would be of the US acting in cases that are technically illegal and only so related directly to this kind of surveillance (like ELF, bradley manning, mccarthyism (not to mention other, foreign policy related or historical atrocities)), I certainly do not think that, even if we pretend the US always has super great intentions, they are not always the best to have stick their hands in things. I wonder…

But COINTELPRO was 40 years ago and a huge scandal that led to many of the restrictions that our current intelligence operations work under.

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#383

Post by AlexandrB »

twoodfin wrote: post #382
intrazoo wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most my examples would be of the US acting in cases that are technically illegal and only so related directly to this kind of surveillance (like ELF, bradley manning, mccarthyism (not to mention other, foreign policy related or historical atrocities)), I certainly do not think that, even if we pretend the US always has super great intentions, they are not always the best to have stick their hands in things. I wonder…

But COINTELPRO was 40 years ago and a huge scandal that led to many of the restrictions that our current intelligence operations work under.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#384

Post by AlexandrB »

gnaritas wrote: post #229
nitrogen wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be their database, but it's our lives.

Which you voluntarily shared with Facebook and not a violation of the constitution. If you want privacy, don't share it on the Internet.

This argument is weak because everything is "shared on the internet" at this point - including phone calls.

How is this different than saying "if you want privacy don't share over the postal system" or "if you want privacy don't share over the phone"?

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#387

Post by hga »

eclipxe wrote: post #165
sologoub wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As many have stated, the problem is with inevitable abuse of power. It may or may not be happening now, but it will. Recent IRS disclosure that they targeted Tea Party-linked organizations for audits is one example. I doubt it was deliberately ordered by the administration, but someone, somewhere thought it was a good idea. Search queries alone will probably tell you which way a person is leaning in an election. That…

Tea party groups weren't targeted for audits. Groups that applied for tax exempt status on basis of providing social welfare were sent for additional screening to ensure the group was not primarily a political group. There were over 300 applications sent for additional screening. 1/3 were conservative groups. 1/3 were liberal. The whole problem was the selection criteria for being reviewed - based on the name of the…

Your argument fails when it's noted that famous "Social Welfare" 501(c)(4) organizations include the NRA's lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action, and the new version of Obama's Organizing for America, Organizing for Action. Perhaps ironically, the latter's first major action was to campaign for gun control after Newtown.

In other words, the parameters of 501(c)(4) organizations were already well established, and being primarily "political" (when you think about it, a rather vaguely broad term) is just fine, you're focusing too much on the words of art "social welfare" vs. what they mean in practice.

Even Obamacon (con as in "conservative") Peggy Nonan has woken up and realized the implications of this (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732441260457851...):

"What does it mean when half the country—literally half the country—understands that the revenue-gathering arm of its federal government is politically corrupt, sees them as targets, and will shoot at them if they try to raise their heads? That is the kind of thing that can kill a country, letting half its citizens believe that they no longer have full political rights."

Do you really think that's OK?

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#388

Post by hga »

bsaul wrote: post #371

It's funny how people in the US hate government so much that they seem more outraged by a national agency collecting meta-data for antiterrorism purpose, than private company collecting content for ad targeting.

In the previous century governments killed upwards of a quarter billion of their own people; I'm unaware of any even vaguely comparable mass murders by corporations.

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#389

Post by hga »

blantonl wrote: post #174

Dropbox coming soon? Dropbox better come out ASAP with a formal response to this. But honestly, it might not even matter because if the NSA has targeted Dropbox, any betting man would say that it is already part of the problem. Ugh...

If Dropbox is handed a National Security Letter (NSL), unless they want to go to Federal prison their people have no choice but to lie about it.

Look at some of the discussions where these companies' carefully worded denials are parsed, they aren't really denying it. E.g. "back doors" aren't an issue when a NSL is used to come through the front door.

Re: US intelligence mining data from 9 US Internet companies in broad secret program

#390

Post by EthanHeilman »

dsl wrote: post #289
nitrogen wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does Skype's key exchange work? If the supernode hands out an address for a server that intercepts the call, would the Skype client still accept it and connect?

The protocol itself is highly obfuscated, but from my understanding of what has been published it works something like this: (lots of disclaimers here that nobody outside of Microsoft/Skype really knows for sure) When logging in an RSA public/private key pair is generated and the public key is sent up to the server. The username to public key mapping is seeded to supernodes and inserted into the global address book.…

Can you provide a source for the statement:

>If you are a government agency with a private key that matches one of the observer public keys (Russia, China, and India have openly claimed to have these

I am not calling bullshit, I just want to know more.

Post reply on HN