Live data from Hacker News

N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

nytimes.com

61–70 of 147 posts

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#61
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the use of acting naive about foreign affairs, diplomacy, and statecraft? Are you really suggesting that your country's intelligence service doesn't attempt to do the same?

The USA has diplomatic relations with foreign countries based on trust. They also trade with those foreign countries - and that international trade is what makes the economy and our lifestyles work. Targeting "all foreigners" destroys trust that foreigners have in the USA system for trade and diplomacy, lowering the impact of the state on both.

Comments like this make me think that maybe all the "acting naive about foreign affairs, diplomacy, and statecraft" is not actually acting.

In the entire human history of diplomatic relations, nations have always attempted to spy on one another. Diplomatic relations are not based on trust, they are based on shared beliefs, interests, and goals.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#62
post #24
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's to say that American intelligence gathering is on the right 'side'? Why should members of 'foreign' countries be held to a different standard?

Can we get a Politics tab on the HN bar so we can filter the endless political debates? This should make everyone happy?

It would certainly make me happier.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#63
post #37

This is another example of how Snowden has compromised national security by leaking secret information that has nothing to do with American metadata and everything to do with the NSA's charter and legal mission.

I'm a fan of Snowden, but I agree. He needs to be more selective in what he releases.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#65
post #51
post #12

"In most cases, the radio frequency hardware must be physically inserted by a spy, a manufacturer or an unwitting user." [emphasis added]

US manufacturers sold pre-bugged equipment to the eastern bloc during the cold war, so why not now?

Today it is just a well publicly known feature of modern Intel CPU (officially it is stated to be disabled on some CPUs :)

http://www.realvnc.com/products/viewerplus/

"Computers with particular Intel® Core™ vPro™ processors enjoy the benefit of a VNC-compatible Server embedded directly onto the chip, enabling permanent remote access and control. A RealVNC collaboration with Intel's ground-breaking hardware has produced VNC Viewer Plus, able to connect even if the computer is powered off, or has no functioning operating system."

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#66
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus, the assumption that they're only using their surveillance technologies against foreign powers is now known to (often) be a false assumption. So it's not immediately clear which systems are only being used against foreign powers, so one wouldn't even know what might be held back (if one were to take the position that things only affecting espionage against other nations should be kept quiet).

Exactly. The entire argument rests on the idea that we are certain that the NSA is trustworthy and is using its powers judiciously against, not only foreign powers, but those that pose a security risk. That assertion is exactly what is in question (for good reason). I think some people see the NSA as fundamentally good and trustworthy, but perhaps exercising a little bad judgment and/or overreach. Others see their br…

US allies see this as industrial espionage not overreach

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#67
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an odd argument and seems completely circular. You effectively state that the leaks aren't such a good thing ipso facto, then you go on to say that leaking these details proves it; thus they shouldn't be leaked. Kind of hard to find where that argument begins and ends. I know where your thinking is going, but you would first have to establish the NSA's trustworthiness to get there. That is exactly what is in q…

I think he means that a distinction should be made when considering whether to leak information. Is this information something the public needs to know, because it tells them something important about their democracy, or would releasing this be an ironic hindrance to the common public interest? That's how I read it anyway.

The "common public interest" should not be limited to the US public. (even if it were, I'd argue that they are only mutually exclusive in the short term).

IMHO, the public should know everything its government is doing on its behalf. A more appropriate question would be how long the government is allowed to keep its secrets.

I don't dispute that there is definite realpolitik value in keeping secrets when trying to achieve short-term gains. However defaulting prevents that society in the future from determining if your actions were just when done in their name. Every time a politician acts in the name of myself and my fellow citizens, it reflects on me. On the other hand, I and my fellow citizens voted that person in to get things done on my behalf. The eventual publication of all governmental secrets keeps governments honest long term. After aboute ~10 years, a secret poorly received when made public after the fact no longer reflects poorly on the current officials in government (unless those responsible are still involved in government). What it does do is allow society to have a debate about whether they approve in hindsight of a government's actions.

If the government wants to keep a certain category of secret indefinitely, it should specifically ask the public if they acquiesce via a majority vote. A future public should be able to overturn that vote and make something public. Unilaterally affording government officials the right to make things secret indefinitely is a path to tyranny. The truth keeps governments honest.

Does such a policy put a country at a disadvantage when competing against adversaries without such a policy? Yes, it does, in the short term, since any governmental actor must consider the potential for fallout when their actions/policies enter the public domain. On the other hand, there are long term game theoretic advantages of holding your country to a higher standard. It establishes a basis upon which the population of other democratic countries judge their own government.

The US used to have this positive influence upon the World. There was a time when citizens of less free countries would look to the US and ask themselves, "Why can't my country be free like the US?". That question is no longer asked because we are no longer a guiding light for the world to follow, instead we've become the ship on the beach that has become the lighthouse to the sea.

Long-term, citizens the whole world over are going to be better off by establishing a precedence that everything their governments do in their name (from the local and state levels to the federal) will eventually become public.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also secured facilities generally monitor for things like unauthorized WiFi access points and clients.

Did the article say these devices use WiFi, or do they use something else?

They discuss range measured in miles, so I don't think wifi would fit the bill.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#69
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the use of acting naive about foreign affairs, diplomacy, and statecraft? Are you really suggesting that your country's intelligence service doesn't attempt to do the same?

The USA has diplomatic relations with foreign countries based on trust. They also trade with those foreign countries - and that international trade is what makes the economy and our lifestyles work. Targeting "all foreigners" destroys trust that foreigners have in the USA system for trade and diplomacy, lowering the impact of the state on both.

trust, but verify.

Re: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers

#70
oh man when does this stop? these guys are clearly breaking the law all in the name of "keeping us safe from terrorists". This needs to be stopped. All the perpetrators of this program must be brought to justice with a court that adheres to the principals of democracy and freedom.
Post reply on HN