NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand • Hacker News Board

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#91

Post by woodman » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 1:34 AM UTC

jonknee wrote: post #85

43gg43g32g wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> seriously doubt the NSA was tasked with working a non-terrorism related piracy case They go after literally everything. Do people not remember the snowden leaks?

Which Snowden leak showed that the NSA was being used to aid piracy investigations? I'm not disputing they had the technical ability to suck up various Kim Dotcom selectors, just that they have no public reason to do so and there is no evidence that they have.

> Which Snowden leak showed that the NSA was being used to aid piracy investigations?

I'm not aware of any assistance rendered to piracy investigations, but there is ample evidence of them sharing intel for the purpose of domestic law enforcement - which is way worse. So the call for direct evidence is nice (and silly considering the nature of the evidence), but the logic of "our boys would never" is pretty soundly blown out of the water. They have every reason to - and no reason not to, as there is no punitive action even after being caught.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intel...

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#92

Post by arca_vorago » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 1:52 AM UTC

jonknee wrote: post #85

43gg43g32g wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> seriously doubt the NSA was tasked with working a non-terrorism related piracy case They go after literally everything. Do people not remember the snowden leaks?

Which Snowden leak showed that the NSA was being used to aid piracy investigations? I'm not disputing they had the technical ability to suck up various Kim Dotcom selectors, just that they have no public reason to do so and there is no evidence that they have.

While I have had my tiffs with KDC (publicly on twitter usually), this entire thread that seems to ignore the five-eyes loopholes is extremely disingenuous. NSA wants everything, so that they or some other three letter can walk the cat back later from data in their massive data centers. Ever since the 90's and echelon days we knew the 47 UKUS core agreement of the "five-eyes" (which later expanded to more) was abused by letting foreign agencies surveil an allies citizens, bypassing their own domestic restrictions, and then when they handed the raw data over, since it came from another source, and they didn't do the "collection", it wasn't a violation.

As a matter of fact, those of us who were warning about the NSA et al before Snowden were heavily relying on these 90's revelations to extrapolate what they were doing given the same system and new technology in a super-connected world.

So, for all the people in this thread to act like it's absurd that NSA was spying on KDC is ridiculously intellectually dishonest. NSA might not care about KDC individually, because they are just backdooring all the equipment (core router/switch backdoors, fiber splitters, etc) at backbone node junctions and they are gobbling up as much as possible for sifting later. Hence the word games the NSA leaders were playing with congress about collection vs wiretaping etc.

It's the NSA sharing raw data with Israelis in reverse, and it's happening all over to the point that the data sharing agreements themselves seem to me to be more of a security risk than the individuals they might deem worthy of a selector.

What's even more amazing to me is that on hn in years past you would have already been called out on this. I think hn is quickly becoming a place for business-people pretending to be hackers instead of the other way around, and it's shameful, but a different discussion I suppose.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#93

Post by willstrafach » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 2:06 AM UTC

arca_vorago wrote: post #92

jonknee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which Snowden leak showed that the NSA was being used to aid piracy investigations? I'm not disputing they had the technical ability to suck up various Kim Dotcom selectors, just that they have no public reason to do so and there is no evidence that they have.

While I have had my tiffs with KDC (publicly on twitter usually), this entire thread that seems to ignore the five-eyes loopholes is extremely disingenuous. NSA wants everything , so that they or some other three letter can walk the cat back later from data in their massive data centers. Ever since the 90's and echelon days we knew the 47 UKUS core agreement of the "five-eyes" (which later expanded to more) was abuse…

> bypassing their own domestic restrictions

This is often repeated, but I don't believe any evidence has been published to indicate this is happening.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#94

Post by jonknee » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 2:14 AM UTC

arca_vorago wrote: post #92

jonknee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which Snowden leak showed that the NSA was being used to aid piracy investigations? I'm not disputing they had the technical ability to suck up various Kim Dotcom selectors, just that they have no public reason to do so and there is no evidence that they have.

While I have had my tiffs with KDC (publicly on twitter usually), this entire thread that seems to ignore the five-eyes loopholes is extremely disingenuous. NSA wants everything , so that they or some other three letter can walk the cat back later from data in their massive data centers. Ever since the 90's and echelon days we knew the 47 UKUS core agreement of the "five-eyes" (which later expanded to more) was abuse…

I think it is completely possible the NSA was snooping on a non-US citizen running a largely criminal enterprise (especially if you count incidental collection). My point was that despite the headline there is no evidence that they were. The only person saying so is the known liar who ran the scam.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#95

Post by ceejayoz » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 2:24 AM UTC

peter422 wrote: post #77

moomin wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worth pointing out at this point that Kim is a heavily-documented liar. If he told me the sky was blue, I'd go outside to check.

Don't worry, he has been meticulously collecting evidence and can prove everything! Unfortunately he can't post it just yet, but he'll definitely post it soon! Maybe next week! Or next month! But it's gonna be huge!!!

(Right after he gives Hannity his other scoop: https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/866016183815942144)

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#96

Post by arca_vorago » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 2:26 AM UTC

willstrafach wrote: post #93

arca_vorago wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I have had my tiffs with KDC (publicly on twitter usually), this entire thread that seems to ignore the five-eyes loopholes is extremely disingenuous. NSA wants everything , so that they or some other three letter can walk the cat back later from data in their massive data centers. Ever since the 90's and echelon days we knew the 47 UKUS core agreement of the "five-eyes" (which later expanded to more) was abuse…

> bypassing their own domestic restrictions This is often repeated, but I don't believe any evidence has been published to indicate this is happening.

So in 7 years when a leaker finally leaks the documents that prove it ala Snowden, I wonder what thing we will be warning ya'll about that you will claim has "no evidence".

Look, as a fairly rational conspiracy theorist, I recognize the importance of evidence, but in cases like this, it's very unlikely unless a leak happens for you to ever get it, and hence instead of looking for deductive evidence you can never rely on getting, you have to use inductive logic instead, and the difference between the two logical methods (inductive/deductive) is an important distinction that isn't made enough.

Do we have hard evidence that KDC was spied on specifically? No. Do we have inductive reason to believe it's probable? Very much so.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/20/us-uk-secret-d...

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#97

Post by willstrafach » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 2:34 AM UTC

woodman wrote: post #91

jonknee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which Snowden leak showed that the NSA was being used to aid piracy investigations? I'm not disputing they had the technical ability to suck up various Kim Dotcom selectors, just that they have no public reason to do so and there is no evidence that they have.

> Which Snowden leak showed that the NSA was being used to aid piracy investigations? I'm not aware of any assistance rendered to piracy investigations, but there is ample evidence of them sharing intel for the purpose of domestic law enforcement - which is way worse. So the call for direct evidence is nice (and silly considering the nature of the evidence), but the logic of "our boys would never" is pretty soundly b…

It is fine to speculate, but I believe the "call" for direct evidence (versus unsubstantiated claims) makes sense given the headline stating the unsubstantiated claim as if it were a fact.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#98

Post by drunkenmonkey » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 2:55 AM UTC

arca_vorago wrote: post #92

jonknee wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which Snowden leak showed that the NSA was being used to aid piracy investigations? I'm not disputing they had the technical ability to suck up various Kim Dotcom selectors, just that they have no public reason to do so and there is no evidence that they have.

While I have had my tiffs with KDC (publicly on twitter usually), this entire thread that seems to ignore the five-eyes loopholes is extremely disingenuous. NSA wants everything , so that they or some other three letter can walk the cat back later from data in their massive data centers. Ever since the 90's and echelon days we knew the 47 UKUS core agreement of the "five-eyes" (which later expanded to more) was abuse…

it's time for honest people like you to stop interacting with the plebs directly, and to start to educate them through mass-spectacle more. You're of a different breed; remember it.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#99

Post by Spooky23 » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 3:05 AM UTC

summer_steven wrote: post #87

wildmusings wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Economic security is national security. You can't really separate them once you're thinking past the immediate short term. A richer enemy will have better weapons, better technology, better surveillance, and better leverage.

> Economic security is national security. You can't really separate them once you're thinking past the immediate short term. A richer enemy will have better weapons, better technology, better surveillance, and better leverage. Economic security for the well-connected comes at the expense of economic security for the average citizen. It gave economic security to Ford Motor Company when a law imposing 30% tariffs on al…

It gives economic security to about 12,000 Ford employees and their families in Dearborn, MI and Kansas City, and probably another 50,000-100,000 people in supplier and supporting roles.

Re: NSA Unlawfully Surveiled Kim Dotcom in New Zealand

#100

Post by willstrafach » Wed, Aug 02, 2017, 3:17 AM UTC

arca_vorago wrote: post #96

willstrafach wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> bypassing their own domestic restrictions This is often repeated, but I don't believe any evidence has been published to indicate this is happening.

So in 7 years when a leaker finally leaks the documents that prove it ala Snowden, I wonder what thing we will be warning ya'll about that you will claim has "no evidence". Look, as a fairly rational conspiracy theorist, I recognize the importance of evidence, but in cases like this, it's very unlikely unless a leak happens for you to ever get it, and hence instead of looking for deductive evidence you can never rely…

What is the goal in discussing something if there is no proof? I just don't quite understand.

If there was evidence of such loopholes, people could demand change from their representatives. Without proof, I guess the only thing someone can do is repeat it in any IC-related thread on HN to get some easy karma points (Seens to work well!).