Slashdot Mirror


The Hardware Behind Echelon Revealed

Whispering Bob writes "Techworld has got an interesting article on the technology behind the Echelon spying networks run by the US, UK, Cananda and Australia. Apparently the super storage and analysing technology used in the US is sold by privately owned Texas Memory Systems. It can deal with one trillion floating point operations per second. Now that's some technology."

344 comments

  1. Cananda? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Do you editors even READ this stuff?

    1. Re:Cananda? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      O Cananda!
      Our home and native land1
      True oatriot love in all thy sons commadn.
      WIth glowing hearts we see thee rise.
      The true north strong ansd free!
      from far and wide,
      O Cananda, we stand on gaurd for thee.
      God keep our land glorious and free!
      O Cananda, we stand on gaurd for thee.
      O Cananda, we stand on gaurd for thee.

    2. Re:Cananda? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +5 KIK

      I mean LOL!

    3. Re:Cananda? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you need to starting typing with two hands

    4. Re:Cananda? by Easy2RememberNick · · Score: 3, Funny

      Eye halve a spelling chequer. It came with my pea sea.
      It plainly marques four my revue miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

      Eye strike a key and type a word and weight four it two say
      Weather eye am wrong oar write. It shows me strait a weigh.

      As soon as a mist ache is maid. It nose bee fore two long
      And eye can put the error rite. Its rarely ever wrong.

      Eye have run this poem threw it. I am shore your pleased two no.
      Its letter perfect in it's weight. My chequer tolled me sew.

      Sauce Unknown
      (Reader's Digest)

  2. Hrm. can't access the site... by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 5, Funny

    You bastards. You've slashdotted echelon.

    1. Re:Hrm. can't access the site... by davron05 · · Score: 5, Informative

      direct link to the mirrordot cache

    2. Re:Hrm. can't access the site... by Kind420 · · Score: 1

      Hahahahaha Looks like the first post has it. This site was down at the begining of the /. D'oh!

    3. Re:Hrm. can't access the site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they are listening to *everything*, surely we implicitly slashdot them anytime we slashdot anything?

    4. Re:Hrm. can't access the site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Want to know the hardware behind Echelon? http://www.angelfire.com/scary/echelon/

    5. Re:Hrm. can't access the site... by bobbozzo · · Score: 1

      The mirrordot cache isn't working either. The header comes up, and that's it.

      Mirrordot's home page works though.

      I think it got slashdotted before mirrordot picked it up, or something like that.

      --
      Nothing to see here; Move along.
    6. Re:Hrm. can't access the site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems to work for me. Here's the text from it.
      --
      Want to know the hardware behind Echelon?

      Uncle Sam using Texas' SAM.

      By Chris Mellor, Techworld

      You've probably heard about Echelon, the vast listening system run by the US, UK, Canada and Australia that scans the world's voice traffic looking for key words and phrases.

      Aside from using the system for industrial espionage and bypassing international and national laws to listen in on people, it is also used to listen out for people like Osama bin Laden and assorted terrorists in the hope of preventing attacks.

      All this is out in the relative open thanks to investigative journalists and a European Commission report into the system, concerned and annoyed that the Brits and Yanks has got there first.

      It works like this: The calls are recorded by geo-stationary spy satellites and listening stations, such as the UK's Menworth Hill, which combine satellite-intercepted calls and trunk landline intercepts and forward them on to centres, such as the US' Fort Meade, where supercomputers work on the recordings in real time.

      But what, you ask, can deal with that overwhelming mass of data that helps our government spy on the world? And how does it work?

      Well, a Texas Memory Systems SAM product - a combined solid-state disk (SSD) and DSP (digital signal processor). Woody Hutsell, an executive VP at TMS, said: "Fifty percent of our revenue this year will come from DSP systems, more than last year. The systems are a combination of SSD with DSP ASICs." ASICs are application-specific integrated circuits - chips dedicated to a specific purpose.

      TMS has a TM-44 DSP chip which has 8 GFLOPS of processing power - that's eight billion floating point operations per second. The processing uses floating point arithmatic operations to supply the accuracy needed for the analysis. A DSP chip turns analogue signals from a sensor or recorder into digital information usable by a computer. Digital cameras will use a DSP to turn the light signals coming through the lens into digital picture element, or pixel, information.

      A SAM-650 product is called a 192 GFLOPS DSP supercomputer by TMS. It is just 3U high and has 24 DSP chips and is positioned as a back-end number cruncher controlled by any standard server - a similar architecture to that used by Cray supercomputers. There are vast streams of information coming from recorded telephone conversations. The ability to have the DSPs work in parallel speeds up analysis enormously. Spinning hard drives can't feed the DSPs fast enough, nor are they quick enough for subsequent software analysis of the data. Consequently TMS uses its solid state technology to provide a buffer up to 32GB that keeps the DSPs operating at full speed.

      A cluster of five SAM-650's provides a terra flop of processing power; one trillion floating point operations per second.

      Echelon is a global surveillance network set up in Cold War days to provide the US goverment with intelligence data about Russia. One of the main contractors is Raytheon. Lockheed Martin has been involved in writing software for it. Since then it has expanded into a general listening facility, an electronic vacuum cleaner, sucking up the world's telephone conversations. Information about it's existence has been reluctantly revealed, prompted by scandals such as the recordings of Princess Diana's telephone calls by the NSA.

      Recorded signals are fed into the TMS SAM systems where the DSPs filter out the noise to produce much clearer signals that software can work on to detect individual voices, perform voice recognition, and listen out for keywords, such as, for example, "Semtex". Decryption of encrypted calls is also a likely activity.

      Hutsell says the SAM systems, "are supplied to intelligence agencies and the military though system integrators like Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Zeta. It's an intelligence community application involving data from various sources. This is loaded into RAM and then real-ti

  3. For those that didn't already know by Pingular · · Score: 4, Informative
    --

    When anger rises, think of the consequences.
    Confucius (551 BC - 479 BC)
    1. Re:For those that didn't already know by hype7 · · Score: 1

      man Wikipedia is cool :)

      anyway, despite what that tech is used for, it is damn cool tech.

      I'd like to think that I could trust the people who it has been designed for, in particular the chief architect and user of the system, the US Govt. However, these past couple of years, with all the shit that's been going on, I'm starting to wonder. I mean, they seem to know how to use it to get an advantage for their companies, but they can't use it to stop one of the largest attacks on US soil in the country's history.

      Hmmm.

      -- james

    2. Re:For those that didn't already know by SlamMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just a thought. If it had been prevented, something else would be the largest attack on US soil. So maybe it already has prevented bigger things?

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    3. Re:For those that didn't already know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      James Bamford has a new book out about this called "Pretext for War", which tells how the intelligence community botched detecting the World Trade Center attacks (over a period of over half a decade!) and how the Bush administration dealt with the aftermath. It's quite interesting, and kind of addresses what you're talking about here.

      James Bamford has written good books about the NSA and other "spy agencies" before. Like those, it's an incredibly interesting read.

    4. Re:For those that didn't already know by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      If its anything like the other ones, it'll also be about 1/3 accurate. I've worked at "spy agencies" and his work is pleasantly fictional, and more accurate than movies like "Enemy of the State" or "Sneakers," but still wrong.

      If he was in the loop for some of the things he's writen, then he'd probably be in jail for breach of his lifetime obligation agreements.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    5. Re:For those that didn't already know by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      A-ha! But if he were thrown in jail, wouldn't that be like the government admitting he was right, thus spurring much further sales and guaranteed readership?

    6. Re:For those that didn't already know by mikefe · · Score: 1

      I think you meant: ECHELON

      --
      There: Something at a specific location.
      Their: Owned by someone.
      Please make sure your english compiles.
    7. Re:For those that didn't already know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that were the case, the administration would have paraded the fact for some PR, regardless of the fact that it could compromise the system. We would have heard about it.

    8. Re:For those that didn't already know by Ivan+the+Terrible · · Score: 1
      If its anything like the other ones, it'll also be about 1/3 accurate... his work is pleasantly fictional... but still wrong.

      This is the first time I've heard one of James Bamford's books being called "wrong". In what ways is it wrong?

  4. need a mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where is the mirror ?

    1. Re:need a mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On my shoe so I can see up girl's skirts.

      In about a minute or two somebody will post a coral cache and it won't work either. Why slashbots insist on linking to these is beyond me. Have they ever worked?

    2. Re:need a mirror by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > In about a minute or two somebody will post a coral cache and
      > it won't work either. Why slashbots insist on linking to these is
      > beyond me. Have they ever worked

      Two in about the 20 times I've tried. it's Just Not Big Enough.

      Funniest bit is some of us are mirroring sites on home DSL/cable links, and they stay up longer than the coral cache.

    3. Re:need a mirror by Vicsun · · Score: 1

      Then why not use mirrordot for mirroring purposes?

    4. Re:need a mirror by shish · · Score: 1

      I would guess that coral only caches images and such, the html is always pulled from the site itself to make sute that it's always up-to-date. The down side of being up to date is that when it's slashdotted you get the most up-to-date error message. If people use the coral cache /before/ it gets slashdotted, it all works fine.

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    5. Re:need a mirror by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      (Lan-Di)
      > where is the mirror?
      (Iwao)
      > I've no intention of telling you.

    6. Re:need a mirror by jdog1016 · · Score: 1

      Actually, when Mirrordot started, I submitted to slashdot about it, only to be rejected within about an hour. So, I assumed this meant that someone else had done a better job than I and that it would be posted shortly. NEVER HAPPENED. The fact is, Slashdot just doesn't give a fuck. Their quality of service sucks. Their webpage sucks so bad that it would look right at home in 1995 and by the way, don't try to validate them for XHTML, because they fucking block the validator. Hopefully at some point browsers will fail to support Slashdot so that they will get up off their ass and fix their broken website.

  5. ..and you thought it was legend all along! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    one comment and slashdotted - is this page hosted on someone's grandmothers 10 yearold machine on a dialup dynip?

  6. Evil they are! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Posting as annoyomous coward due to evil echelon listening post in the hills behind me. Will get my revenge.

  7. Mirror by HyperChicken · · Score: 4, Funny

    http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:4mzhQXtHaVoJ: www.techworld.com/storage/news/index.cfm%3FNewsID% 3D2430+&hl=en Brought to you by Google. Google: For when the NSA supercomputer network just isn't enough.

    --
    Free of Flash! Free of Flash!
    1. Re:Mirror by HyperChicken · · Score: 3, Informative
      --
      Free of Flash! Free of Flash!
    2. Re:Mirror by wfberg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      linkification extension for firefox for copy-and-pasting impaired.

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    3. Re:Mirror by HyperChicken · · Score: 1

      Hmm.... It was there before... *runs*

      --
      Free of Flash! Free of Flash!
    4. Re:Mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, man. Totally fucking suspicious. The Frankenstein anti-sex lasers from space are coming to fucking get you!

    5. Re:Mirror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't work becuase Slashdot mangles the links.

  8. Mirror here. by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 1, Informative

    You've probably heard about Echelon, the vast listening system run by the US, UK, Canada and Australia that scans the world's voice traffic looking for key words and phrases.

    Aside from using the system for industrial espionage and bypassing international and national laws to listen in on people, it is also used to listen out for people like Osama bin Laden and assorted terrorists in the hope of preventing attacks.

    All this is out in the relative open thanks to investigative journalists and a European Commission report into the system, concerned and annoyed that the Brits and Yanks has got there first.

    It works like this: The calls are recorded by geo-stationary spy satellites and listening stations, such as the UK's Menworth Hill, which combine satellite-intercepted calls and trunk landline intercepts and forward them on to centres, such as the US' Fort Meade, where supercomputers work on the recordings in real time.

    But what, you ask, can deal with that overwhelming mass of data that helps our government spy on the world? And how does it work?

    Well, a Texas Memory Systems SAM product - a combined solid-state disk (SSD) and DSP (digital signal processor). Woody Hutsell, an executive VP at TMS, said: "Fifty percent of our revenue this year will come from DSP systems, more than last year. The systems are a combination of SSD with DSP ASICs." ASICs are application-specific integrated circuits - chips dedicated to a specific purpose.

    TMS has a TM-44 DSP chip which has 8 GFLOPS of processing power - that's eight billion floating point operations per second. The processing uses floating point arithmatic operations to supply the accuracy needed for the analysis. A DSP chip turns analogue signals from a sensor or recorder into digital information usable by a computer. Digital cameras will use a DSP to turn the light signals coming through the lens into digital picture element, or pixel, information.

    A SAM-650 product is called a 192 GFLOPS DSP supercomputer by TMS. It is just 3U high and has 24 DSP chips and is positioned as a back-end number cruncher controlled by any standard server - a similar architecture to that used by Cray supercomputers. There are vast streams of information coming from recorded telephone conversations. The ability to have the DSPs work in parallel speeds up analysis enormously. Spinning hard drives can't feed the DSPs fast enough, nor are they quick enough for subsequent software analysis of the data. Consequently TMS uses its solid state technology to provide a buffer up to 32GB that keeps the DSPs operating at full speed.

    A cluster of five SAM-650's provides a terra flop of processing power; one trillion floating point operations per second.

    Echelon is a global surveillance network set up in Cold War days to provide the US goverment with intelligence data about Russia. One of the main contractors is Raytheon. Lockheed Martin has been involved in writing software for it. Since then it has expanded into a general listening facility, an electronic vacuum cleaner, sucking up the world's telephone conversations. Information about it's existence has been reluctantly revealed, prompted by scandals such as the recordings of Princess Diana's telephone calls by the NSA.

    Recorded signals are fed into the TMS SAM systems where the DSPs filter out the noise to produce much clearer signals that software can work on to detect individual voices, perform voice recognition, and listen out for keywords, such as, for example, "Semtex". Decryption of encrypted calls is also a likely activity.

    Hutsell says the SAM systems, "are supplied to intelligence agencies and the military though system integrators like Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Zeta. It's an intelligence community application involving data from various sources. This is loaded into RAM and then real-time analysis is carried out on it. Step one is to filter out the noise and our DSP chips are used for that. Then they look into patterns using other tools - images or voice. It's

    1. Re:Mirror here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "A cluster of five SAM-650's provides a terra flop of processing power; one trillion floating point operations per second." Uhm... that would be teraflop... morons.

    2. Re:Mirror here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless they were anticipating the hardware crumbling to the earth under the weight of a slashdotting.

    3. Re:Mirror here. by ChiRaven · · Score: 1
      "A cluster of five SAM-650's provides a terra flop of processing power; one trillion floating point operations per second."

      Pppppffff! That's nothing. In 10 years we'll all have at least that much on our desktops. And five years after that, in our wristwatches.

  9. Hmm..never heard by Tracer_Bullet82 · · Score: 5, Funny

    of cananda.
    That damn intelligence war must be really working. :)

    --


    Timang tinggi tinggi
    parang sudah asah
    alang alang mandi
    biar sampai basah
    1. Re:Hmm..never heard by xutopia · · Score: 5, Funny

      that's not *intelligence war* but *war on intelligence*.

    2. Re:Hmm..never heard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sh*t, I'm American and I can't even find it on the map - what's USA stand for again ?

      I know, I know, Unified Sh*ts of Airhead.

      We're the dog damn best nation and I'll piss on you if you say anything else - we *gave* you your dog damn free speeeeeeech thingy thing, doflip, whatchamacallit thing thingamy ... I love my bush, I lick it each night....

      Sh*t, somehone's spooking me again ....

    3. Re:Hmm..never heard by Alsee · · Score: 1

      It's the first War-on-X that the US is actually winning. Just look at our president.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  10. Full Article text for the impatient or paranoid by Yo+Maing · · Score: 5, Informative
    Want to know the hardware behind Echelon? Uncle Sam using Texas' SAM.

    By Chris Mellor, Techworld

    You've probably heard about Echelon, the vast listening system run by the US, UK, Canada and Australia that scans the world's voice traffic looking for key words and phrases.

    Aside from using the system for industrial espionage and bypassing international and national laws to listen in on people, it is also used to listen out for people like Osama bin Laden and assorted terrorists in the hope of preventing attacks.

    All this is out in the relative open thanks to investigative journalists and a European Commission report into the system, concerned and annoyed that the Brits and Yanks has got there first.

    It works like this: The calls are recorded by geo-stationary spy satellites and listening stations, such as the UK's Menworth Hill, which combine satellite-intercepted calls and trunk landline intercepts and forward them on to centres, such as the US' Fort Meade, where supercomputers work on the recordings in real time.

    But what, you ask, can deal with that overwhelming mass of data that helps our government spy on the world? And how does it work?

    Well, a Texas Memory Systems SAM product - a combined solid-state disk (SSD) and DSP (digital signal processor). Woody Hutsell, an executive VP at TMS, said: "Fifty percent of our revenue this year will come from DSP systems, more than last year. The systems are a combination of SSD with DSP ASICs." ASICs are application-specific integrated circuits - chips dedicated to a specific purpose.

    TMS has a TM-44 DSP chip which has 8 GFLOPS of processing power - that's eight billion floating point operations per second. The processing uses floating point arithmatic operations to supply the accuracy needed for the analysis. A DSP chip turns analogue signals from a sensor or recorder into digital information usable by a computer. Digital cameras will use a DSP to turn the light signals coming through the lens into digital picture element, or pixel, information.

    A SAM-650 product is called a 192 GFLOPS DSP supercomputer by TMS. It is just 3U high and has 24 DSP chips and is positioned as a back-end number cruncher controlled by any standard server - a similar architecture to that used by Cray supercomputers. There are vast streams of information coming from recorded telephone conversations. The ability to have the DSPs work in parallel speeds up analysis enormously. Spinning hard drives can't feed the DSPs fast enough, nor are they quick enough for subsequent software analysis of the data. Consequently TMS uses its solid state technology to provide a buffer up to 32GB that keeps the DSPs operating at full speed.

    A cluster of five SAM-650's provides a terra flop of processing power; one trillion floating point operations per second.

    Echelon is a global surveillance network set up in Cold War days to provide the US goverment with intelligence data about Russia. One of the main contractors is Raytheon. Lockheed Martin has been involved in writing software for it. Since then it has expanded into a general listening facility, an electronic vacuum cleaner, sucking up the world's telephone conversations. Information about it's existence has been reluctantly revealed, prompted by scandals such as the recordings of Princess Diana's telephone calls by the NSA.

    Recorded signals are fed into the TMS SAM systems where the DSPs filter out the noise to produce much clearer signals that software can work on to detect individual voices, perform voice recognition, and listen out for keywords, such as, for example, "Semtex". Decryption of encrypted calls is also a likely activity.

    Hutsell says the SAM systems, "are supplied to intelligence agencies and the military though system integrators like Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Zeta. It's an intelligence community application involving data from various sources. This is loaded into RAM and then real-time analysis is carried out on

    1. Re:Full Article text for the impatient or paranoid by turgid · · Score: 1

      Just think if the RIAA and BPI had access to this system!

    2. Re:Full Article text for the impatient or paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A cluster of five SAM-650's provides a terra flop of processing power; one trillion floating point operations per second.

      Mmm, this terra flop sounds interesting... wasn't there this book about a one terra flop computer that got demolished for a intergalactic highway or something... However I must say that I'm disappointed that one terra flop only equals trillion fp ops/s.

    3. Re:Full Article text for the impatient or paranoid by Anonymous+Luddite · · Score: 1


      I wonder what the list of 'hotwords' is?

      some of the posters are joking about slashdotting echelon, but it could be done. Imagine if everyone reading this thread picked up a phone, called a friend and said five or six of the keywords.

      So much for real-time analysis.

    4. Re:Full Article text for the impatient or paranoid by mikael · · Score: 4, Informative

      Some other links with pictures:

      Sam-650

      Sam-650 User Manual

      TM-44 ASIC

      Solid State Disks

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    5. Re:Full Article text for the impatient or paranoid by blackbear · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Imagine if everyone reading this thread picked up a phone, called a friend and said five or six of the keywords.

      Actually, that wouldn't do a thing. Since the system has to scan all if its traffic in order to hit on something anyway, then you haven't increased the load on the system. Having more hits only means more items are flagged for analysis. And unless the system is undersized, it will simply continue to process up to the maximum capacity of the public telecom networks on which it's listening. A hard limit, that can only be increased by installing more hardware, or more efficient utilization of that hardware by the telecom companies. Either way, the upper limit of flash mobs is the size of the infrastructure on which they play.

      On the other hand, if you're talking about the analysis of hits, you have another set of problems. If I were designing such a system I would qualify possible hits with a correlation of some sort. We know, for example, that through Beysian statical analysis a correlation exists in natural language between certian types of tokens within a given communication. Detecting threats should be very similar to detecting spam, once the analysis engine is properly trained. Implement that training in hardware, and you have a very fast analysis engine.

    6. Re:Full Article text for the impatient or paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just called,
      to say,
      SEMTEX!

      Lyrics (C) Semtex Wonder

    7. Re:Full Article text for the impatient or paranoid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read James Bamford's _Body of Secrets_, both editions--the one before 9/11 and the one after. "D'oh!" NSA was cut to the bone and couldn't keep linguists and analysts. Doesn't matter how much data you vacuum out of cyberspace if you still don't produce information out of it. And once you produce information from it, you still can't make a moronic bogus cracker Commander-in-Thief read it. The only thing that's changed since 1970 is the miniaturization of the hardware--not the management and not the morons.

  11. Echelon... by imsabbel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hm.
    1 Tflops would place it anywhere between place 240 (if it were sustained) or 500+ (if it were peak) on the current top500.
    Not THAT amazing.
    Also, i dont quite realize how important floating point ops are in a data-warehousing application. They just pile up tons of (faxes/emails/phone recording).

    Btw: Remember the story about the 5MW wind-generator a few weeks ago?
    The company cant sell in the us because echelon was used to sniff fax messages that were later given to a us company (kenetech windpower) which made a patent. Complete with the original tying errors. (who was it again who said "whats good for boeing is good for america"?)
    (story from ZEIT, titles "treason between friends", here http://hermes.zeit.de/pdf/archiv/archiv/1999/40/19 9940.nsa_2_.xml.pdf

    --
    HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    1. Re:Echelon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to hear more about this. Is there an English version of that article anywhere?

    2. Re:Echelon... by Detritus · · Score: 1

      It gets a little more interesting if you have a football field size room full of these gadgets. Years ago, someone researched the number of incoming telephone lines to Fort Meade, it was huge.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    3. Re:Echelon... by torpor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not THAT amazing.

      I don't give a fratz about fanboix 'trainspotting' about this computing system. It means nothing that its 'not cool'.

      Just the fact that it 'only takes' a computer in the 200's region of the top500 to spy on a massive human population is impressive.

      Not fanboix whiney trainspotting. Think 'culture, eating itself'.

      Moving on .. what if this system were a -public- resource rather than a secret one? Imagine the possibilities for rock and roll!

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    4. Re:Echelon... by andreyw · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Its pretty impressive considering it was designed back in the days when the SOVIETS existed.

      Makes you think what kind of advanced computers they have now that no one will find about for another 10+ years...

    5. Re:Echelon... by wpanderson · · Score: 2, Funny

      In Soviet Russia, telephone call monitoring system calls YOU!

      --
      neuro at well dot com (when I post, it's my opinions, no-one elses)
    6. Re:Echelon... by boredMDer · · Score: 1

      'Complete with the original tying errors. '

      heh.

      And the story you mention is here.

    7. Re:Echelon... by bobbis.u · · Score: 1
      A cluster of 5 units has a teraflop of processing. I couldn't see anywhere where it said how many of these they have.

      The thing that is amazing is that you have a teraflop in 15U! Just imagine a room full of the things, and that might give you more indication of the amount of processing needed to spy on everyone.

    8. Re:Echelon... by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      These are DSPs. They can process data. Most likely phonecalls....
      The giant databases that are produced that way still need some more basic data-warehousing. Like a score of IBM R6000 or so.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    9. Re:Echelon... by skinfitz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1 Tflops would place it anywhere between place 240 (if it were sustained) or 500+ (if it were peak) on the current top500. Not THAT amazing.

      That's 1 Tflop per cluster of 5 boxen - I expect they use many such clusters:

      "A SAM-650 product is called a 192 GFLOPS DSP supercomputer by TMS. It is just 3U high and has 24 DSP chips and is positioned as a back-end number cruncher controlled by any standard server - a similar architecture to that used by Cray supercomputers. There are vast streams of information coming from recorded telephone conversations. The ability to have the DSPs work in parallel speeds up analysis enormously. Spinning hard drives can't feed the DSPs fast enough, nor are they quick enough for subsequent software analysis of the data. Consequently TMS uses its solid state technology to provide a buffer up to 32GB that keeps the DSPs operating at full speed.

      A cluster of five SAM-650's provides a terra flop of processing power; one trillion floating point operations per second."

    10. Re:Echelon... by SuperFrink · · Score: 1

      Also, i dont quite realize how important floating point ops are in a data-warehousing application. They just pile up tons of (faxes/emails/phone recording).

      It has been a while but as I recall Digital Signal Processing is very floating-point intensive. It really is a specialized application so as far as I know whenever posible a DSP is used instead of a general CPU. I seem to recall that DSPs have special shift register capabilities (like 1024 bits) for example. Maybe someone else here can elaborate.

      Also search google for info on FFT (Fast Fourier Transform). As I recal the idea is any sound wave can be represented by a sum of different sine waves and a Fourier transform is applied to the input sound to get a set of sine functions which produce the sound. (I think that's what happens but again maybe someone else can explain things a bit more clearly.)

    11. Re:Echelon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The company cant sell in the us because echelon was used to sniff fax messages that were later given to a us company (kenetech windpower) which made a patent. Complete with the original tying errors. (who was it again who said "whats good for boeing is good for america"?)

      Or, more accurately, "the US company, Kenetech, ended up with some designs from the German company and we are going to assume ECHELON was involved". You obviously don't seem to realize how frequently economic espionige goes on - and I'm talk about methods that don't involve ECHELON. France and Israel are conduct MAJOR amounts of industrial espionage against the US. But, if an American company does it everyone points fingers at the US government and hypes up fears about ECHELON.

  12. I was under the assumption that.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not all the governments involved in this had confirmed its' existance. I think Canada, Australia and New Zealand did, but not the US or UK, or something like that anyway. If it's not confirmed, and is certainly still quite secretive, how can Techworld even know about this stuff? Also, why are they allowed to print such possibly-damaging text?

    1. Re:I was under the assumption that.. by scottking · · Score: 1

      there's this principle democratic nations have called "freedom of the press". although watching cnn has made me wonder if it's just a catchphrase these days.

      --
      scott king
    2. Re:I was under the assumption that.. by jimicus · · Score: 1

      RTFA. It's not particularly damaging. In a nutshell, the article says:

      "Echelon exists"

      This has been public domain knowledge for some time.

      "It uses computer technology to snoop communications"

      Well, that makes sense. Unless you want to go through all the millions of calls made on this planet by hand.

      "It uses custom hardware in order to do so"

      No kidding. I always assumed they had a handful of servers running Windows 2000 running the whole thing. </sarcasm>

      "It probably handles encrypted communications as well"

      More than likely. The only thing open to question is "exactly what level of encryption can it break easily?"

    3. Re:I was under the assumption that.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "exactly what level of encryption can it break easily?"

      It can't.

      Most of the traffic is unencrypted. Because people are stupid. Just use proper encryption (not from NAI, Crypto AG, or other backdoored people) and be done with it.

  13. okay... by imsabbel · · Score: 1

    When i wrote this, the link was slashdotted and no mirrors present.
    A dsp cluster... That makes the performance even less impressive...
    The grape guys in japan created that much flops per asic...

    --
    HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
  14. Echelon? Easily avoided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just use some Vi@gra and Septic T@nks in your email!

  15. Here's what the article basically says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The Echelon system is basically a beowulf cluster of Symbian sex machines.

    1. Re:Here's what the article basically says by Carl+T · · Score: 1

      Symbian sex machine? Remind me never to borrow your smartphone.

      --

      This signature is not in the public domain.
    2. Re:Here's what the article basically says by ThatbookwritingWheel · · Score: 1

      Err, to be nitpicky. You probably mean "Sybian Sex Machines".

      I don't know anything about them however, was just doing research on the subject. ;-)

      --
      We are all packets in the Internet of life!
  16. They still use ASICS !! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What ? The US spy department still relies on ASICs ?

    Don't they heard of FPGAs ?!

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:They still use ASICS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ASICs are much cheaper when mass produced and provide better performance.

    2. Re:They still use ASICS !! by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      Doesnt the government have to buy from the lowest bidder?

    3. Re:They still use ASICS !! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

      The masking of ASICs alone cost upwards to millions, and the devices used by the spy agencies won't need mass production at all.

      It would more sense to use APPS along with FPGAs for version specific fine tuning.

      No wonder they still can't catch Osama Bin Laden :)

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    4. Re:They still use ASICS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boy, are you wrong! You can get ASICs done for 18,000$.

    5. Re:They still use ASICS !! by rob13572468 · · Score: 5, Informative

      it really depends on how many asic's are being used. true the design costs are very high but it still becomes economically more desirable to use the asic platform as long as the production run is high enough (100K units and up). the cost of a production run asic is so low compared to fpga that even with the design costs factored in, its the less expensive way to go. that being said, it probably will not stay that way much longer; the 8 bit microcontroller market for years offered up the devices in flash for small runs or masked rom for large runs. Since the manufacturers naturally want the devices to be as inexpensive as poossible, they tend to migrate the flash devices to the smallest/newest fab technologies which brings the price down alot. We are now seeing flash devices being used for large production runs as well with the programming being handled right on the production line with the added benefits of things like chip serialization being easily handled which was difficult to do with a masked chip. This has not happened yet with FPGA's; the main reason being that FPGA's have considerably larger gate counts but even so it wont be much longer until we see FPGA's being used in all but the most price-critical and the highest volume applications where a few thousand gates and/or a few cents make the difference. a good example of this is the xm radio chipset which has a very high gate count and yet needs to be offered up in a device that will retail at $49. an FPGA would simply cost too much and be too large ad the devices get smaller and cheaper. The other reason why we have not seen more FPGA usage has to do with competition; the 8 bit market has a large number of players who are all offering up products that are in direct competition with eachother and that has naturally driven down the costs and at the same time offered up much in the way of innovation and new features. the FPGA market, while growing does not have quite the same number of players although that is changing as well. a few more years and most of the players will be producing FPGA products and thats when things will really start to get interesting.

    6. Re:They still use ASICS !! by nsaspook · · Score: 1

      I was making custom ASIC chips using e-beam to generate the masks 14 years ago. Old stuff.

      Current tech.
      Based on a raster-scan architecture and equipped with 50-Kv electron optics, the eXara tool enables the production of a photomask in less than seven hours, according to Etec. Competitive vector-scan tools can take up to 20-40 hours or longer to produce a similar photomask set.

      --
      In GOD we trust, all others we monitor.
    7. Re:They still use ASICS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      ... and they should prefer ADIDAS !!

    8. Re:They still use ASICS !! by iroll · · Score: 1

      Not if they can show that this company is a sole-source provider of this technology. Reasons for that could range from patent implications to secrecy clearance, or could simply be "hemmed and hawed" away.... a lot of times if you really want/need somebody to be your sole-source, you can bs your way through the paperwork--especially if you're the NSA.

      --
      Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
    9. Re:They still use ASICS !! by bliksem · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Using FPGAs for an Echelon type system where maximizing GB/s is a primary goal? Unlikely.

      I work on digital system designs clocked in the 150MHz region. No problem at all meeting the timing constraints on a typical 0.13um ASIC technology. We use FPGA's for testing and validation, however, and the latest and greatest FPGA's are maxing out with our designs at around 90MHz.

      Now look at the clock speeds on the x86 you are using to browse this page. 3GHz maybe? How fast would this design run on FPGA (assuming it would fit)? Unlikely to reach even 1/10th the speed. Why not say to Intel/AMD/TI "You still use ASICs!?!"

      In terms of speed, current FPGA technology cannot get anyway near the performance of a well optimized ASIC design (even with the same core process technology).

      How about a new type of slashdot effect... we pick a few random bad words and slashdotters make sure to mention them several times in all phone conversations.

    10. Re:They still use ASICS !! by Lord+Prox · · Score: 5, Funny

      How about a new type of slashdot effect... we pick a few random bad words and slashdotters make sure to mention them several times in all phone conversations.

      Thats a capitol idea, comrad. you are da bomb. Now, if you will excuse me while I nuke a burrito and trim a bush in my back yard. See for several days this bag dad bought has been getting on my last nerve. Gas up the lincon, we are going to kill some time.

    11. Re:They still use ASICS !! by Ignis+Flatus · · Score: 1

      There are also other considerations that would be factored into building a government system. One is spares. Even though the numbers being quoted here to make ASIC cost effective may be much higher than what is actually used in the system, the government may have decided to go ahead and purchase enough spares to last for the life of the program, and then some.

      Second is testing. Government specs may require that the system be "fully tested", and ASIC may give more flexibility to the designers to build the system to be testable.

      And don't forget that this will be a highly classified super-duper secret system, and even the very thought of a Field-PROGAMMABLE Gate Array is enough to invoke fear and dread into the minds of those who approve these things. And I happen to agree, btw. It'd be much harder to compromise the system.

      Personally, I'd hate to think what it'd be like to work on this project. Getting info on some aspect of your little task is probably a nightmare. I bet that overall, the cost of ASIC versus FPGA doesn't matter.

    12. Re:They still use ASICS !! by JGski · · Score: 1
      As already mentioned, FPGAs, et al. probably won't give the performance needed. Fine for functional prototyping perhaps.

      Some 20 years ago I was deeply involved in creating custom designed and manufactured microprocessors (MIL-STD-1750A instruction set). There were off-the-shelf varieties but none that could perform in the space environments the target system required (specifically a phase of SDI). The key factor was there was nothing available that was ultra radiation hard and met power and weight specs. So we had a 3 contractor "bake-off" to create the fab process and the processor. When we got 1st silicon from each, we had to allocate the wafers from each IC vendor to the two contractors for the systems contract - the entire project only required a dozen or so 6" wafers worth of processors. My boss decided I should take the responsibility for swapping wafers from the supplier cassettes to each system vendor cassettes. He of course cutely reminded me: "Don't drop one - those cost the government $20M each". Gee, thanks, I've worked on the project long enough to know that. He was sort of an ass that way.

      At least in this case they didn't need to create the fab process itself also! For space-based stuff that isn't always the case. Hopefully they used an on-shore foundry though - not many left!

    13. Re:They still use ASICS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You bet they have!!!

    14. Re:They still use ASICS !! by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yes, provided that all the bidders demonstrate basic financial solvency, as well as the ability to deliver the solution (similar previous contracts or other evidence). So, for something that has never been done before, it is easy to pick and choose. But that is only if they go to open bid. There are some reasons to prevent that. I suppose that for national security (for a while they denied that there even was an Echelon), they may not have opened the bid up. Also, there are some projects where the company with the standard contract gets the business unless they wish to not have the business. For instance, MCI has the contract with the US gvt for communications. So, MCI sells the gvt a T1 at about 4 times what they'd be able to buy it for on the open market. Or Haliburton gets US work and gets awarded billions of work uncontested contracts in Iraq. The goal is to streamline the bid process.

  17. skynet by WormholeFiend · · Score: 5, Funny

    Spy in the sky satellites listen in to what we say and look at what we do. Then solid state disk keeps the real time analysis of these calls and images operating at full speed. The world's fastest storage system is used in the world's most sophisticated spying operation.

    Here's to hoping it never becomes sentient.

    1. Re:skynet by supabeast! · · Score: 1

      And what makes you think that it hasn't? If you really think about it, the people with the money, means, and need for sentient computers are the same people who wouldn't ever breathe a work about it to anyone.

  18. slashdotting..? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If enough people made phonecalls that were dilliberately saturated with keywords (say a few million at once)
    Would it be possible to effectively slashdot their supercomputer? >:P

    1. Re:slashdotting..? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, If you tried to overwhelm their supercomputer with keywords, it would probably just flag that .3% of the population as left-leaning trouble makers. Their names would be silently noted in a file somewhere.

    2. Re:slashdotting..? by I)_MaLaClYpSe_(I · · Score: 1
      You know, back then in 2001 we had alot against echelon. I can remember beeing outraged beacause of the topic when we discussed about it on HAL2001.

      Then we had a jam echelon day shortly after 9/11. Of course only few participated because everybody felt ashamed about it.

      At HAL2001 lists with words that would trigger echelon were published and they included words like "steak-knife" (the codename of a double agent) or "sex". But I can't say that those were not published by TLA agents.

      But mostly we were concerned with the european cybercrime convention act.

      Ahh, those were the times...

    3. Re:slashdotting..? by danalien · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Baahh, don't think many 'slashdotters' like to use the phone much at all.

      Instead, if everyone started encrypting their emails, or for that fact anything we'd send over the internet (to someone), with a 1024-bit or 4096-bit PGP-key(s) ... it'll be a big set back for them. Not that they aren't able to break the encryption ... is just that it'll take them a few seconds to break ONE ${ITEM} ... so if ONE billion people (we are approaching that many no. of users) sent around encrypted ${ITEMS} it'll saturate their computing power quite effectivelly

      and sure, they'll be able to eventually boost up their breaking ... but then what we'd all have to do is just boost up our key to ...say a 16384-bit PGP key ... and they'll be crawling on their knees again

      ... and the thing is, THEY are 100% aware of the fact ... it's just that WE (all of us) aren't acting in a unified manner ... and this suits them. It's the basic 'A Bugs Life'-story, they are the 'grasshoppers' and we are the 'Ants' ... and we are 'dim' enough not to realize that we are 'stronger' then them ... IF we would all join in on a joint force against them.

      --
      I don't claim I know more than I know, and if you know you know more than I know, then by all means, let me know.
  19. OK, let's have some fun by kurt555gs · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now that we know how it works, lets all , I mean all call some one on our cell phone and say:

    "John has a long moustache"

    lol

    --
    * Carthago Delenda Est *
    1. Re:OK, let's have some fun by identity0 · · Score: 1

      No, let's all make calls the consist of slashdot in-jokes, until the NSA thinks slashdot is a haven for terrorists.

      "First post!"
      "In Soviet Russia, YOU monitor Echelon!"
      "I gots the hot grits pouring down my pants..."
      "STFU! STFU! RTFA!"
      "Imagine a Beowulf cluster of..."
      "...Natalie Portman, petrified..."
      "...but does she run Linux?"
      "4. Profit!"

  20. And what about...? by El+Icaro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What do china, north/south korea and other protective countries do about this?

    And does this listen on to the internet communications (modem beep beep blonk sounds) also?

    And finaly, what do they use this information for? Would the use it against a politician if it posed a threat for them (aka blackmailing them) or someone else?

    The world is more and more terrifying every day.

    1. Re:And what about...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's extensive law on the books about what they are and aren't allowed to do. Especially since Watergate. (Politicians REALLY don't like being targeted by spooky spy organizations.) Declassified publically available policy documents spell out how it's illegal for US spy organizations to explicitly target US citizens. Systems like this (that don't target any one person, but EVERYONE) must drop information collected about US citizens. Then you just have to figure out how to determine that one end of a conversation is a 'merican.

      Remember that the empyloees of the NSA are people. Just normal people. I'm sure there are lots really upstanding members of the organization as well as a few crooks. Just like any organization, you can't keep it perfect but you can keep bad things from happening with enough levels of checks. I doubt there's any massive amounts of blackmail happening with info from these systems but it could be possible.

    2. Re:And what about...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The declassified docs you mentioned can be found at http://www.politrix.org/foia/nsa/nsa-ussid18.htm

      I recomend you all read these documents and find out for yourself what the FACTS are. Educate yourself.

  21. SD6 and Marshall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully SD-6 doesnt find out about this article.... oh wait Marshall already has the source code in his head and he'll probably GPL it.

  22. So, if Echelon is also in the UK... by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... why has there not been a terrible 'accident'* in which a 747 filled with 'people'** gets flown into a military observation post by Al-Qaida***?

    * = Accident as in... Remote controlled, no pilot, full speed against military installation.
    ** = On paper, at least. There might be a small error on the flight manifest... Or 400 small errors.
    *** = Play the terrorist card; not only does it draw away suspiscion, it also garners support.

    Besides, what's this who deal about spy satelite? Don't they know it's so very dangerous up there, with all the space debris? Especially this 3-stage 'space debris' which is remarkably shaped like a missile, with an explosive warhead... I wonder how that got up there?

    1. Re:So, if Echelon is also in the UK... by Moderatbastard · · Score: 0
      Slashdot is turning into a harbor for crazy people
      I would question your use of the present tense there.

      Any story about Echelon always brings the foil-hatters out in droves. It's almost as if they're monitoring the internet - chuckle - as if that were possible!

      --
      1/3 of jokes get modded OT. If you get the joke, mod 1 in 3 insightful/interesting/underrated to restore karma balance.
    2. Re:So, if Echelon is also in the UK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What ignorant goddamn fucktards moderated the parent bullshit by Dark Lord Seth (584963) as "Insightful" ??

    3. Re:So, if Echelon is also in the UK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is there always such hostility to asking questions or mumbling out loud about a conspiracy theory? Such much effort into shutting up that which is so obviously BS.

      Are you as vocal against the Mormons, or are your beliefs that weak?

      *remembers when even the mention of Echelon was met by a loud "rational" chorus of detractors*

  23. nice article for guys who love Star Treck movies by Max_W · · Score: 1, Informative

    Download from www.pacifica.org the MP3 the interview with the former translator, who worked for the US state agencies. She says that the translation practice is bad. Just download and listen to what real people, who work the system, say. Indeed if the system is so nice, why 9/11 could happen? I guess it is similar to Regan's Star War technology; - to mislead people in believing that they can control everything, to reduce the usage of telephony and e mail.

  24. They didn't ask for MY price ..... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    So, I'm afraid they didn't get the lowest bid. :(

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  25. Echelon in theory and practice by Artifakt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wondering just what Echelon is looking for?
    The word lists used by Echelon are highly classified (which of course makes sense if the goal is to keep people such as terrorists from knowing what words to avoid using). However, this also means that public oversight is impossible. Some information does get leaked to us outsiders from time to time, but always as unconfirmable rumors.
    Here's a few of those that seem likelyest to have at least a grain of truth.
    1. Echelon lists include lots of specific words that are used by people with training, and few general words widely used by the public. Words such as "Explosive" or phrases such as "Blow Up" won't get a hit, but more specific terms, i.e. "PETN", or "Semtex", may be on the list.
    2. The list is updated, both by a general review board every few months, and immediately if a particular concern warrents it. (This rummor is apperently the only thing about the system that has been officially confirmed by testimony before congress in an open session).
    3. The list is largely focused on detecting Nuclear weapons tech. It looks for correct technical names of bomb components, among other things. Lately, this has been expanded to focus more on bio-weapons.
    4. The list includes names of some public officials. Rumor has it that Attourny Generals and FBI and CIA directors have had their names placed on the list to help protect them. Janet Reno was supposedly kept on the list for a year after she left office because of concerns right-wing U.S. domestic terrorists were especially likely to target her. People running the system are reluctant to put public figures on the list, because they get too many false positives to wade through.
    5. The system looks for multiple hits and grades them algorythmicly. Several entries in the same phone call, particularly entries that are logically related, will add up to a conversation that crosses a critical threshold and is brought to the attention of a human supervisor.

    It's easy to see some ways this could be abused. For example, it could be used to help protect all the presidential candidates in an election year, but just looking for the candidate's last names would generate billions of fales positives. So, in order to 'protect' all the candidates, it would be necessary to monitor for less well known information, like the names of various campaign advisors, private addresses, or other such info, which would give the people running the system a lot of leeway in listening to calls made by the opposition during their run for the office.

    --
    Who is John Cabal?
    1. Re:Echelon in theory and practice by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      The system looks for multiple hits and grades them algorythmicly.

      PigeonRank?

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:Echelon in theory and practice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If by highly confidential you mean 'confidential' or at most 'secret (codeword)' - then yeah I guess that's pretty secret. It's not that difficult to get words added to the dictionary, just about anyone can do it providing they have a reasonable argument. They are only words and phrases! It's the result set that may be classified higher or simply dumped if found to be irrelevant. The scary boxes (from a DSD perspective) are the ones controlled fully by other allied agencies (off shore). Hell, a little industrial espionage never hurt anyone though.

      Does posting anonymously really keep me anonymous

    3. Re:Echelon in theory and practice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For another look at how it works, look at how SPAM detection products classify email. It's doing the same thing, just looking for a different word/feature set - score high enough on SpamAssasin and you are spam (and thus should be tossed), score high enough on Echelon and you might be important security intel (thus an should be forwarded on to a human).

    4. Re:Echelon in theory and practice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Work in Kojarena?

  26. Re:nice article for guys who love Star Treck movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Star Treck"

    Is this a video you buy on a street corner? Like those cheap Rollex watches I keep being offered?

  27. I know this has been talked about before but... by gone.fishing · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know that this has been talked about before on Slashdot but I think the most disturbing thing about Echelon isn't the hardware (although I'd bet there is a great deal more to it than the current article talks about) but the fact that it is used to spy on whoever it happens to pickup. A certain keyword in a communication is all that it takes to get Echelon's attention and then you are in it's grasp.

    If you happen to be a U.S. citizen or resident, it is unlawful for the U.S. government to monitor your communications without a warrant. This is no problem for Echelon, the Canadians or the Brits will do it for the U.S. It is one giant loophole for the governments involved to spy on their own people as well as anyone else.

    I don't really have that much to hide but I do value my rights and my privacy so that bothers me. I know that the powers-that-be justify this as being part of the defense of the free world, that this is a necessary component on the war on terrorisiom and that such draconian measures are justified to keep us safe. But, if I have to give up my rights, my privlidges as a resident of a free country, I can't accept that explaination. Simply because the tool has become a tool of a different kind of terror. It is a took used by a represive government, used against it's own people.

    I fear a repressive regime in my own country far more than I fear Osama Bin Laden and his henchmen.

    So many of the changes made since 9/11 have played into the hands of terrorists. The changes have made the way we live, the way we travel, and the way we do business much more restrictive and expensive. Airport security is probably the most glaring example of this. We aren't anonymous travelers just getting from place to place anymore. We are electronically monitored, our travels documented. Those TSA agents and airport police aren't free - every traveler and every citizen pays for them.

    Echelon is worse than that in some ways. We don't know if or when our conversations and other communications are monitored. It is hidden from our view, shielded behind a digital curtain of secrecy. If it is used against us, we will probably never know.

    Some people probably say: "What's the big deal if it is also used to catch drug dealers anyway? They are just criminals." I can understand that position but have to say that it is a pretty narrow view. The truth is that you can't make two wrongs make a right. A regime that turns it's military against it's own people isn't very far from being the enemy. This is the kind of thing that the Gestapo did in Germany. It is just wrong.

    I'm glad to think that I live in a free country. I'm just not sure that we are as free as we think we are. I'm afraid that we already have our own version of "secret police."

    1. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by WildBeast · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In short, they can have each country spy on another one in order to avoid the laws of the land.

      They're even trying to legalise Extraordinary rendition so they can send suspects to countries that practice torture for interrogation. It's illegal for us to kick the shit out of suspects but it's not illegal in those countries that we wanna invade.

      As long as nobody gives a damn, it'll keep getting worst.

    2. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by amper · · Score: 4, Insightful
      A couple of points that need emphasizing...

      I don't really have that much to hide but I do value my rights and my privacy so that bothers me.


      I think it's unfortunate that you felt it necessary to make this statement. Whether or not you (or I, or anyone else, for that matter) have anything to hide is irrelevant to this discussion. The Constitution of the United States of America codifies the primacy of individual freedom that was expressed in the Declaration of Independence and should not be abridged. The Constitution is the Law of the Land. Period. End of discussion.

      also,

      Some people probably say: "What's the big deal if it is also used to catch drug dealers anyway? They are just criminals." I can understand that position but have to say that it is a pretty narrow view.


      I do not understand that position at all. "Just criminals"? The basis of all freedom is the freedom to break the law. The true horror of Echelon is that it is yet another attempt by weak-minded, fear-filled fools who do not understand this to drag us further down the path of Tyranny in the name of Security. Echelon makes the assumption that we are all criminals.

      When we have effectively legislated all thought in a misguided attempt to prevent ThoughtCrime, we have ceased to be a free society. The idea that the interests of the State take primacy over the interests of individuals has a name...it's called Fascism.
      .
    3. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by Deadstick · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Some people probably say: "What's the big deal if it is also used to catch drug dealers anyway? They are just criminals."

      Yeah, and the dialog usually goes something like this:

      "You can't do that. It violates Article--"

      "But it's drugs."

      "Oh, OK."

      rj

    4. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen!!!

    5. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by Tony-A · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The changes have made the way we live, the way we travel, and the way we do business much more restrictive and expensive.

      If the terrorists say "jump" and we say "how high?", the terrorists have won.

    6. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      > I think it's unfortunate that you felt it necessary to make this statement. Whether or not you (or I, or anyone else, for that matter) have anything to hide is irrelevant to this discussion. The Constitution of the United States of America codifies the primacy of individual freedom that was expressed in the Declaration of Independence and should not be abridged. The Constitution is the Law of the Land. Period. End of discussion.

      As a non-citizen living legally in the USA I live without the benefit of the "Constitution", and under the daily threat of indefinite detention without recourse. Fuck the "Constitution" I say, and all those who invoke it as a protection. Human rights are not to be abrogated by your venerable paperwork.

    7. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by onepoint · · Score: 1

      >> As a non-citizen living legally in the USA I live without the benefit of the "Constitution", and under the daily threat of indefinite detention without recourse.

      That is not 100% correct, you have certain rights, which just by being in the USA ( legal or not ) that are granted to you.

      I don't know about indefinite dentention, but it would seem that it should be illegal in the USA. All the imigrants that I have encountered over the years have never mentioned any sort of dentention that lasted over 1 year or that they did not have family notified within a short while of thier arrival.

      Now if you are a combatant or a merc, the code of military law could apply ( my understanding is that merc's are in the gray area and have zero rights )

      Onepoint

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    8. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by M1FCJ · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Mission creep is important. In London there are three bankers who are fighting against an extradition request. These guys are being handed over to USA because of a law passed in UK after 9/11. This is based on a one-way agreement with USA where UK will hand anyone USA requests but USA will never hand anyone to UK. When this was passed, it was hinted that this would be used against terrorist suspects.

      Only after a couple of years, it is used when it is found convenient.

      Probably the bankers are guilty as hell, as all bankers are, but I'm not comfortable with handing someone to USA just because someone there thinks they are guilty. What will happen when someone in USA's state department decides that I'm a threat to USA? Will I be shipped over without even being able to argue against their case?

    9. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Probably the bankers are guilty as hell, as all bankers are,

      Considering noone is taking them to court in the UK, even tho the 'crime' was purpatrated in the UK, the 'victims' were in the UK, and the 'criminals' were in the UK, and in both the UK and the US there exists (or used to exist) a 'innocent until proven guilty' ethos, why are they probably guilty? And if anyone says 'well, why are they fighting their extradition if they have nothing to prove?' I would fight like hell if I was in their shoes. Looking at the state of the US today, theres no way in hell I would want to stand in front of a US court as a foreign citizen.

    10. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by Stealth+Potato · · Score: 1
      It is one giant loophole for the governments involved to spy on their own people as well as anyone else.

      Where is this "loophole"? The Fourth Amendment makes no reference to any particular government or other entity: it simply states a right of the people. The Constitution being the Law of the Land, it is the duty of the United States Government and all its constituents to uphold that Law and those Rights. Hence, the Government may not spy upon its people, nor may it allow any other government to do so.

    11. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by glwtta · · Score: 1
      If you happen to be a U.S. citizen or resident, it is unlawful for the U.S. government to monitor your communications without a warrant.

      This was true at some point (roughly before 2001) which is why they needed the giant loophole of international spying, but they pretty much don't have to bother with loopholes anymore.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    12. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by dajak · · Score: 1

      I don't know about indefinite dentention, but it would seem that it should be illegal in the USA. All the imigrants that I have encountered over the years have never mentioned any sort of dentention that lasted over 1 year or that they did not have family notified within a short while of thier arrival.

      Now if you are a combatant or a merc, the code of military law could apply ( my understanding is that merc's are in the gray area and have zero rights )


      He is referring to section 412 of the Patriot Act, which allows indefinite detention of people that cannot be deported upon a determination that an individual threatens national security, or the safety of the community or any person. The detainees do not ever get a trial or hearing in which the government has to proof its claims. Instead there is a review every 6 months to verify that the detainee is still suspect (in the final version of section 412).

      This provision basically allows the US government to detain any non-citizen indefinitely unless there is another government out there that cares for its lost citizen.

    13. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Don't forget guns. Most laws concerning guns violate the Second Amendment.

    14. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 0

      Amen, brudda. Repressive societies flog themselves with the mantra, "The innocent have nothing to fear."

      Take this line of thought further and you wind up asking, "If the state is innocent, then why does it fear the people?"

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    15. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by fbg111 · · Score: 1

      The Constitution is the Law of the Land. Period. End of discussion.

      The basis of all freedom is the freedom to break the law.

      Logical inconsistencies? Yes, we've heard of them...

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    16. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by Spiked_Three · · Score: 1

      Yes and no, mostly NO.

      True, there are plenty of areas where things like this can be exploited for the wrong goals, and I am sure it does occasionally happen, but 9/11 was one failure out of uncountable successes of intelligence gathered from things like echelon. Think about it. Without echelon we would have 9/11 size disasters every month in every major country. Is your right to privacy really as important as you think it is? You are damn right it is important, but it would be a totally different world if you were really as free as you think you are.
      The truly weak minded are the ones who believe everything is peachy keen. Echelon is a necessary evil - it probably has already saved your life more than once.

      --
      slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
    17. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by M1FCJ · · Score: 1

      Simple: I have a personal problem with all bankers. As Young Ones would say: "Give me more money, you bastards!" :-)

    18. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by amper · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Echelon is a necessary evil - it probably has already saved your life more than once.


      This is exactly the sort of thinking that leads to the implementation of freedom-crushing systems like Echelon.

      Our forefathers understood that there are some things in life than are more important than life itself. I don't need or want my life to be saved by deluded do-gooders like you who seem to think that a false sense of safety and security justifies severe restrictions on my freedom.

      Here's a couple of well-worn quotes for you to digest:

      Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

      From An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania, Anonymous, London, 1759


      and,

      What country before ever existed a century & a half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure.

      Letter from Thomas Jefferson to William Smith, 1787
    19. Re:I know this has been talked about before but... by Spiked_Three · · Score: 1

      yep, you are right. I forgot how well terrorism and weapons of mass destruction where understood in 1759 and 1787. What was I thinking?
      Go forth you brave sole, see you in the after life.

      --
      slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
  28. Can't say I'm impressed or surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It looks like they just used custom designed hardware to take care of all the processing. That also makes the calculating speed look pretty good (not top500 good though), but it can only do one thing, analyzing speech and text.

    Echelon is doing pretty good, they are *a lot* of stories about how echelon was used to give us-based companies an edge over their competitors in countries not involved with echelon. Makes you wonder why the EU is still on speaking terms with the USA.

  29. clueless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    " A DSP chip turns analogue signals from a sensor or recorder into digital information usable by a computer. "

    Um, no that would be a ADC. A DSP is a Digital Signal Processor, which is basically like any other processor just built to do certain types of calculations very fast.

  30. Non-technical background info by bsv368 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The ACLU has a fairly comprehensive, albeit slightly out of date, site dedicated to ECHELON.

  31. Floating point ops? by andika · · Score: 1
    Also, i dont quite realize how important floating point ops are in a data-warehousing application.
    I have a similar question myself. For text pattern matching, we don't need floating point ops IMO. For decryption, we don't need it either. So?
    1. Re:Floating point ops? by freelunch · · Score: 1

      For text pattern matching, we don't need floating point ops IMO. For decryption, we don't need it either. So?

      So you actually thought you were going to get accurate info?

    2. Re:Floating point ops? by Detritus · · Score: 1
      I have a similar question myself. For text pattern matching, we don't need floating point ops IMO. For decryption, we don't need it either. So?

      Cryptanalysis is very dependent on statistics, lots of statistics. That produces a need for fast floating point arithmetic.

      If you look at the biographies of some of the NSA's past cryptanalysts, you can get some hints about the kinds of mathematics that they specialized in.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    3. Re:Floating point ops? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Cryptanalysis of substitution systems or codebooks is dependent on statistics, however, the attacks on many modern cryptosystems are algebraic in nature rather than statistical. From a computer hardware point of view, algebraic attacks will use integer or bit operations. Let me give some examples:

      1. DES. The effective known attack is brute force. (Shimars differential cryptanalysis isn't effective in practice) As those involved in the DES Challenge effort are aware, bit operations were the way to go. There are two main approaches, very wide registers and FPGAs. Other articles seem to imply that both were explored.

      2. AES. AES has not been broken yet. Most attacks being investigated are algebraic in nature. Although somewhat disputed, there is already an attack on the 256 bit key version of AES which runs in 2^230 operations. This attack uses algebra.

      3. Factoring (Public Key crypto). Most approaches to factoring using integer operations. The current key lengths are currently beyond what is possible using publicly known approaches.

      So if it were for modern cryptanalysis, the floating point wouldn't be very useful. If it were for voice processing on the other hand, the floating point would be vital.

      One thing that gets me about modern CS research is that despite how much ends up being put to ends like this researchers still make a big deal about the non-military applications. DARPA funded voice processing for years so that technology like this could be developed. DARPA did not invest billions of dollars to make computers more accessable for the blind. Yet somehow it's news to CS people that the government massively uses the voice processing technology.

    4. Re:Floating point ops? by mjc_w · · Score: 1

      One of the computational resources used by the NSA has been the TextFinder(tm) made by Paracel (www.paracel.com). This implements, in massively parallel hardware, dynamic programming algorithms for text searching.

      Unfortunately, due possibly to management mistakes and the acquisition of Paracel by Celera, Paracel has recently been shut down.

      Wonder what the NSA will do for replacement parts?

      --
      This is the Constitution.This is the Constitution under the Bush administration. Any questions?
    5. Re:Floating point ops? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot one, send a person from "Motorola" to Crypto AG so that when you sell your secure made-in-a-neutral-country phones to Iran, Iraq, the Vatican, etc you can just use an old 386 to "decrypt" the calls.

  32. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because it's analysing VOICE not TEXT. PhD heh!

  33. reason... by imsabbel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I read the FA.
    It doesnt say so exactly, but it looks like those dsp systems could do large-scale speech to text conversion.
    And there (with all those FFTs, ect), FPops in general and DSPs could be useful.

    --
    HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    1. Re:reason... by jovlinger · · Score: 1

      yes, it is generally accepted that echelon has one of its early layers of screening a simple keyword recognition system; mentioning anthrax on a cell phone will likely get you analyzed by more advanced (and hence more computationally expensive) systems.

      Eventually, the output of the system is likely screened by a room full of analysts before being compiled into briefs for the higher-ups.

      Now, it is obvious that you can't afford to throw away any of the intercepts -- tomorrow the NSA might find connections between osama and kerry, and would then want to reanalyze all of kerry's past calls -- so the data volumes are ginormous.

  34. WTF? by t_allardyce · · Score: 1, Funny

    They have technology in Texas??

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    1. Re:WTF? by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      Wow that sounds like a very effective enterprise solution, would it be compatible with my existing oil-based infrastructure? can I also bypass UN restrictions? what can it do in the way of Freedom Management and 'converting' my legacy Bill of Rights?

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    2. Re:WTF? by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Where do you think all that Halliburton cash goes to?

  35. Re:forget technicalities - see the big picture by pesc · · Score: 1

    Cool, you copy the same text posted five minutes earlier and get Karma!

    --

    )9TSS
  36. Re: Stories on Echelon wrt/US commercial espionage by rxmd · · Score: 4, Informative
    I would like to hear more about this. Is there an English version of that article anywhere?
    There are several; the best from a journalistic point of view is probably the one on Heise (English), a German technology news forum from the publishers of Germany's best computer and IT magazines (c't and iX, respectively).

    Others are here, here, here and here . The journalistic quality varies. You might have to search for "Kenetech".

    --
    As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)
  37. Question by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 5, Funny

    You bastards. You've slashdotted echelon.

    Since it's slashdotted, I have a question: could someone please tell me what is that "echelon" thing we are talking about? It seems interesting with those trillion floating point operations and all that but I don't have much time to search for more info right now because I am very busy building a nuclear bomb for Robert Malda, pseudonym CmdrTaco, Commander in Chief of the Slashdot terrorist organisation, and if I don't give it to him before the narcotic transport arrives and he won't be able to assassinate the president on time, then my arse is going to expericence some serious jihad with his weapons of mass destruction, because how else will he be able to overthrow the federal government and start the violent uprising to destroy democracy and bring Islamic fundamentalism to the US? So, could anyone tell me what's that? Thanks.

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
    1. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems you're not the first to market. Seems like the Christain fundamentalists have already seized power in the US. You'll be out of a job very soon and you'll have lots of time to ponder where you went wrong. Was it poor design, lack of a credible market, a death march project, mentally defective thinking perhaps ?

      Can you cast the first stone when there's a massive plank of wood already up your anus and you don't even realise it ?

      Good luck my friend.
      Peace be with you.

    2. Re:Question by SEWilco · · Score: 3, Funny
      Seems like the Christain fundamentalists have already seized power in the US.

      No. John Kerry, well-known Catholic, has not been elected yet.

    3. Re:Question by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Hm ... I think you just threw out enough keywords to get you put away for a long, long time.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    4. Re:Question by NeVR-C · · Score: 1

      Intro on echelon: http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2000/03/000330-echelon 1.htm Want more ? http://cryptome.org/cryptout.htm#Echelon

      --
      - Curiosity is not a default !
    5. Re:Question by NeVR-C · · Score: 1

      Sorry for the formating
      The intro was:
      http://www.fas.org/irp/program/process/echelon.htm

      --
      - Curiosity is not a default !
    6. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you think the Prez really does have some power then ? ... did you see my mouth move just then ?

      Ummm, interesting .... anus, plank, let me ponder this strange concept a little...... oh, well must go, the Batphone's ringing, that must be God.. we have lots of tete a tete's don't cha no.

      Poodle Dip.

    7. Re:Question by kd5ujz · · Score: 1

      The catholic church denied kerry comunion because of his views on abortion, while churches were saying a vote for kerry will lead to the banning of the bible. Kerry can have crackers and grape juice at my house anyday.

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
    8. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. John Kerry, well-known Catholic, has not been elected yet.

      You are confused. Catholics aren't christains. We christains call them catholics.

    9. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh. Welcome to slashdot, where Bush is liberal and Kerry is a fundamentalist. What's next, Michael Moore is obsequious and reverent? Rumsfeld is sane and well-adjusted?

    10. Re:Question by twilightzero · · Score: 1

      LOL amen to that man, mind if I join ya? I'll even bring home baked bread, much tastier than that cracker crap!

      Somehow I'm reminded of the little girl who was gluten intolerant...for first communion she was given a gluten-free wafer, then shortly after the catholic church decided that her communion was invalid because it wasn't a wheat wafer. What a load of horseshit...

      Oh yeah and I prefer grape juice, that wine crap they use tastes like cough syrup mixed with motor oil.

      --

      "Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
    11. Re:Question by twilightzero · · Score: 1

      And another amen! I have nothing wrong with the catholic faith, as such. But I DO have a problem with the fact that the catholic church's power structure is headed by ONE MAN who can basically lead them wherever he feels with some hand waving and a few convincing speeches heavy with "sins" and "holiness".

      After all, where does the bible mention the Pope? The closest thing they had was the gatherings at Jerusalem which, AFAIK, was a gathering of all local church leaders from the area. But that was also back when the church was really two separate parts - the converted jews and the converted gentiles. The councils at Jerusalem were composed I believe of the converted Jews only. The gentiles (who all of us would be considered part of) were, at least at first, only grudgingly accepted by the converted Jews.

      Alright somebody stop me I'm giving a lecture again...at 3 AM...argh! So mod me off topic, email me if ya wanna discuss it more :P

      --

      "Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
    12. Re:Question by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      Michael Moore is obsequious and reverent

      Just call him obs. rev. Moore.

  38. Re:Amazing by tenco · · Score: 1
    Amazing indeed... Since when do you need floating point operations for text matching?!

    Not for text matching, but for numbercrunching.
    Numbercrunching as in RC5-72. I think you get the idea...

  39. Let's Slashdot Echelon! by Linker3000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    OK, we all agree a common time, dial a friend and utter the phrase:

    "George Bush, the President of the United States, would never assasinate an infidel World Leader with Semtex or a radioactive nuclear dirty bomb"

    and see what happens!

    Chew on that Echey baby!

    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
    1. Re:Let's Slashdot Echelon! by ChiRaven · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Reminds me of a solution from a decade ago when the airport security thing was just getting serious. Some people were planning to go through airport security at Orlando, FL during the Chistmas season (lots of kids in the airport) wearing metal underwear. ("You want me to take it off? OK" {flash!})

    2. Re:Let's Slashdot Echelon! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh huh... It's gonna be fun everytime you need to fly after doing that then. "Please bend over sir..."

    3. Re:Let's Slashdot Echelon! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Great idea! You first.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    4. Re:Let's Slashdot Echelon! by Linker3000 · · Score: 1
      It's 'fun' already.

      I 'did the right thing' when working on a 2 week paid contract in the USA about 4 years ago and applied for a business visa. The short story is that the first application for the visa was rejected but when I faxed a copy of the contract to the US Embassy in London they told me to come in and get my visa.

      Because of this, I have to state that I have had a visa refused in the past on the visa form they give you on the plane-which means that whenever I fly in to the USA, I am usually told to go wait in the immigration office. After about an hour, I'm usually 'interviewed':
      Official: So why was the visa refused?
      Me: I had to fax the work contract to the US embassy in London and then I got my visa.
      Official: OK, you can go then.
      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
  40. Serious question by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 4, Insightful

    According to Wikipædia: "ECHELON is the largest electronic spy network in history, run by the United States, the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, capturing telephone calls, faxes and e-mails around the world. ECHELON is estimated to intercept up to 3 billion communications every day." It raises a very serious question: How on Earth do they manage to get 3 billion warrants every day?!

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
    1. Re:Serious question by secolactico · · Score: 1

      How on Earth do they manage to get 3 billion warrants every day?!

      The second largest electronic network is an automated judge/court clerk system able to process and approve up to 3 billion warrants every day.

      --
      No sig
    2. Re:Serious question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      They only require warrants for the tap order; after the tap order's been issued they recieve each individual communication as an individual, serialized entity. All of the major carriers have a system that ties into their switch, and essentially duplicates calls from/to identified numbers and forwards an electronic copy to the NSA via a connected T-1 (or better) line (Call Content Director Unit). These are present in EVERY telephone switching office in America and are essentially a 4" tall box (or multiples for multiple switches) that give essentially a 'back door' to the NSA. Local techs don't know ANYTHING about these boxes.. they're strictly touched by managers and above (and then only on order from the FCC/NSA). It's also neat to see such things as NSA and FBI smartjacks in Telephone COs... you know that they're doing a lot when, in some places, there are 3-4 smartjack cages of 12/24/36 cards each, each handling a single T1 belonging to some federal entity.

      -Anonymous Coward (sure, sure, but I like my job....)

    3. Re:Serious question by DeepHurtn! · · Score: 1

      I think that's one of the main points of the ECHELON as it is set up -- they don't need warrants. Each participating country spies on the citizens of the other participating countries, along with lots of winks and nudges.

    4. Re:Serious question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      > How on Earth do they manage to get 3 billion warrants every day?!

      That's an easy question to answer. (1) They don't need warrants to spy on non-US citizens, (2) the capabilities of ECHELON are vastly exaggerated in an effort to instill fear.

    5. Re:Serious question by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Simple, they dont. The respective intelligence agencies of each country are forbidden from spying on their own citizens without aformentioned warrants. Solution? Get a friendly country involved, no warrants necessary. Echelon is in all probability laid out in such a fasion that the US doesnt get information on its citizens without it passing through even a token foreign intelligence link, and thus US intelligence agencies being able to legitimately claim that the info was passed to them by a friendly nation.

    6. Re:Serious question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err, no.

      They can record any information without a warrant. They will need a warrant however to retrieve said info (basically admit its existence/bring it up for trial).

      Ergo, I can set up a tape recorder in a park to record sounds. If I hear you say something suspicious, I need a court order to use it. I would also require a warrant to record YOU specifically in the park.

      Last I heard, local landlines where pretty safe (too much traffic, even Echelon has limits). Everything that passes an area code is definitely recorded.

    7. Re:Serious question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because each country monitors the others communications tit for tat. For example the USA can monitor any communication outside of its borders. So the US monitors UK comms and vice versa no warant required.

  41. Echelon's exemption list? by seven+of+five · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I'd like to see is the list of numbers blocked from processing. White House? Kremlin? Saudi royal family? Raytheon executives and mistresses? Don't tell me everyone's equal under this scheme.

    1. Re:Echelon's exemption list? by GuyFawkes · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't be silly, all those sorts of people use "scrambler" phones and encrypt.... .. a bit like skype really...

      --
      http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
    2. Re:Echelon's exemption list? by akadruid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't tell me everyone's equal under this scheme.
      some are more equal than others

      --
      "Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." (attrib. Joseph Stalin)
  42. What does it need floating point for anyway? by IgnorantSavage · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm curious about why they mention floating point performance at all since it would seem that integer performance would be far more useful for just about anything Echelon needs to do.

    Anyone know if there is a reason for the floating point reference other than just as a 'gee whiz' number?

    1. Re:What does it need floating point for anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a few words, accuracy given dynamic range of incoming data and numeric representation requirements of these
      classes of algorithms.

      see this or google for brief data in signal processing
      in integer vs. floating point

      http://www.ti.com/etechsept04fltgptwhpaper

    2. Re:What does it need floating point for anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You need floating point for a lot of DSP work. Inverse Discrete Cosine Transforms which are used heavily in audio signals is one area that requires floating point.

    3. Re:What does it need floating point for anyway? by SagSaw · · Score: 2, Informative

      Anyone know if there is a reason for the floating point reference other than just as a 'gee whiz' number?

      Echelon needs to find target words within a spoken converstaion. This implies some heavy-duty voice recognition software, given the large volume of telephone traffic to sift through and low quality of some of the most interesting data (for example, internation calls to thrid-world countries on the other side of the world). Good floating-point performance probably helps in that regard.

      --
      Come test your mettle in the world of Alter Aeon!
  43. Echelon spookwords list by GuyFawkes · · Score: 1, Troll


    just paste them in a couple of random emails every week....

    Rewson, SAFE, Waihopai, INFOSEC, ASPIC, MI6, Information Security, SAI, Information Warfare, IW, IS, Privacy, Information Terrorism, Terrorism Defensive Information, Defense Information Warfare, Offensive Information, Offensive Information Warfare, The Artful Dodger, NAIA, SAPM, ASU, ASTS, National Information Infrastructure, InfoSec, SAO, Reno, Compsec, JICS, Computer Terrorism, Firewalls, Secure Internet Connections, RSP, ISS, JDF, Ermes, Passwords, NAAP, DefCon V, RSO, Hackers, Encryption, ASWS, CUN, CISU, CUSI, M.A.R.E., MARE, UFO, IFO, Pacini, Angela, Espionage, USDOJ, NSA, CIA, S/Key, SSL, FBI, Secert Service, USSS, Defcon, Military, White House, Undercover, NCCS, Mayfly, PGP, SALDV, PEM, resta, RSA, Perl-RSA, MSNBC, bet, AOL, AOL TOS, CIS, CBOT, AIMSX, STARLAN, 3B2, BITNET, SAMU, COSMOS, DATTA, Furbys, E911, FCIC, HTCIA, IACIS, UT/RUS, JANET, ram, JICC, ReMOB, LEETAC, UTU, VNET, BRLO, SADCC, NSLEP, Daffy Duck, SACLANTCEN, FALN, 877, NAVELEXSYSSECENGCEN, BZ, CANSLO, CBNRC, CIDA, JAVA, rsta, Active X, Compsec 97, RENS, LLC, DERA, JIC, rip, rb, Wu, RDI, Mavricks, BIOL, Meta-hackers, ^?, SADT, Steve Case, Tools, RECCEX, Telex, Aldergrove, OTAN, monarchist, NMIC, NIOG, IDB, MID/KL, NADIS, NMI, SEIDM, BNC, CNCIS, STEEPLEBUSH, RG, BSS, DDIS, mixmaster, BCCI, BRGE, Europol, SARL, Military Intelligence, JICA, Scully, recondo, Flame, Infowar, FRU, Bubba, Freeh, Archives, ISADC, CISSP, Sundevil, jack, Investigation, JOTS, ISACA, NCSA, ASVC, spook words, RRF, 1071, Bugs Bunny, Verisign, Secure, ASIO, Lebed, ICE, NRO, Lexis-Nexis, NSCT, SCIF, FLiR, JIC, bce, Lacrosse, Flashbangs, HRT, IRA, EODG, DIA, USCOI, CID, BOP, FINCEN, FLETC, NIJ, ACC, AFSPC, BMDO, site, SASSTIXS, NAVWAN, NRL, RL, NAVWCWPNS, NSWC, USAFA, AHPCRC, ARPA, SARD, LABLINK, USACIL, SAPT, USCG, NRC, ~, O, NSA/CSS, CDC, DOE, SAAM, FMS, HPCC, NTIS, SEL, USCODE, CISE, SIRC, CIM, ISN, DJC, LLNL, bemd, SGC, UNCPCJ, CFC, SABENA, DREO, CDA, SADRS, DRA, SHAPE, bird dog, SACLANT, BECCA, DCJFTF, HALO, SC, TA SAS, Lander, GSM, T Branch, AST, SAMCOMM, HAHO, FKS, 868, GCHQ, DITSA, SORT, AMEMB, NSG, HIC, EDI, benelux, SAS, SBS, SAW, UDT, EODC, GOE, DOE, SAMF, GEO, JRB, 3P-HV, Masuda, Forte, AT, GIGN, Exon Shell, radint, MB, CQB, TECS, CONUS, CTU, RCMP, GRU, SASR, GSG-9, 22nd SAS, GEOS, EADA, SART, BBE, STEP, Echelon, Dictionary, MD2, MD4, MDA, diwn, 747, ASIC, 777, RDI, 767, MI5, 737, MI6, 757, Kh-11, EODN, SHS, ^X, Shayet-13, SADMS, Spetznaz, Recce, 707, CIO, NOCS, Halcon, NSS, Duress, RAID, Uziel, wojo, Psyops, SASCOM, grom, NSIRL, D-11, DF, ZARK, SERT, VIP, ARC, S.E.T. Team, NSWG, MP5k, SATKA, DREC, DEVGRP, DSD, FDM, GRU, LRTS, SIGDEV, NACSI, MEU/SOC,PSAC, PTT, RFI, ZL31, SIGDASYS, TDM. SUKLO, Schengen, SUSLO, TELINT, fake, TEXTA. ELF, LF, MF, Mafia, JASSM, CALCM, TLAM, Wipeout, GII, SIW, MEII, C2W, Burns, Tomlinson, Ufologico Nazionale, Centro, CICAP, MIR, Belknap, Tac, rebels, BLU-97 A/B, 007, nowhere.ch, bronze, Rubin, Arnett, BLU, SIGS, VHF, Recon, peapod, PA598D28, Spall, dort, 50MZ, 11Emc Choe, SATCOMA, UHF, The Hague, SHF, ASIO, SASP, WANK, Colonel, domestic disruption, 5ESS, smuggle, Z-200, 15kg, DUVDEVAN, RFX, nitrate, OIR, Pretoria, M-14, enigma, Bletchley Park, Clandestine, NSO, nkvd, argus, afsatcom, CQB, NVD, Counter Terrorism Security, Enemy of the State, SARA, Rapid Reaction, JSOFC3IP, Corporate Security, OSAll, 192.47.242.7, Baldwin, Wilma, ie.org, cospo.osis.gov, Police, Dateline, Tyrell, KMI, 1ee, Pod, 9705 Samford Road, 20755-6000, sniper, PPS, ASIS, ASLET, TSCM, Security Consulting, M-x spook, Z-150T, Steak Knife, High Security, Security Evaluation, Electronic Surveillance, MI-17, ISR, NSAS, Counterterrorism, real, spies, IWO, eavesdropping, debugging, CCSS, interception, COCOT, NACSI, rhost, rhosts, ASO, SETA, Amherst, Broadside, Capricorn, NAVCM, Gamma, Gorizont, Guppy, NSS, rita, ISSO, submiss, ASDIC, .tc, 2EME REP, FID, 7NL SBS, tekka, captain, 226, .45, nonac, .li, Tony Poe, MJ-12, JASON, Society, Hmong, Majic, evil, zipgun,

    --
    http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
    1. Re:Echelon spookwords list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where did you get this?

      not that i'm a govt spook or anything, just a /.er, but I wonder where one could have found that list...

    2. Re:Echelon spookwords list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pity the kind of person that believes that some bunk list they found on google is actually a word list for the most highly classified computer system in the world. Sorry, but how can you believe that the NSA is interested in Kwajalein atoll, or anything and everything involving the state of Texas....

    3. Re:Echelon spookwords list by Kalak · · Score: 1

      Bugs Bunny and Scully going on a date is high on the list of national threats.

      --
      I am, and always will be, an idiot. Karma: Coma (mostly effected by .hack)
    4. Re:Echelon spookwords list by kayen_telva · · Score: 1

      you cant do that !!! it will raise the signal to noise ration and piss off th###no carrier

      Rewson, SAFE, Waihopai, INFOSEC, ASPIC, MI6, Information Security, SAI, Information Warfare, IW, IS, Privacy, Information Terrorism, Terrorism Defensive Information, Defense Information Warfare, Offensive Information, Offensive Information Warfare, The Artful Dodger, NAIA, SAPM, ASU, ASTS, National Information Infrastructure, InfoSec, SAO, Reno, Compsec, JICS, Computer Terrorism, Firewalls, Secure Internet Connections, RSP, ISS, JDF, Ermes, Passwords, NAAP, DefCon V, RSO, Hackers, Encryption, ASWS, CUN, CISU, CUSI, M.A.R.E., MARE, UFO, IFO, Pacini, Angela, Espionage, USDOJ, NSA, CIA, S/Key, SSL, FBI, Secert Service, USSS, Defcon, Military, White House, Undercover, NCCS, Mayfly, PGP, SALDV, PEM, resta, RSA, Perl-RSA, MSNBC, bet, AOL, AOL TOS, CIS, CBOT, AIMSX, STARLAN, 3B2, BITNET, SAMU, COSMOS, DATTA, Furbys, E911, FCIC, HTCIA, IACIS, UT/RUS, JANET, ram, JICC, ReMOB, LEETAC, UTU, VNET, BRLO, SADCC, NSLEP, Daffy Duck, SACLANTCEN, FALN, 877, NAVELEXSYSSECENGCEN, BZ, CANSLO, CBNRC, CIDA, JAVA, rsta, Active X, Compsec 97, RENS, LLC, DERA, JIC, rip, rb, Wu, RDI, Mavricks, BIOL, Meta-hackers, ^?, SADT, Steve Case, Tools, RECCEX, Telex, Aldergrove, OTAN, monarchist, NMIC, NIOG, IDB, MID/KL, NADIS, NMI, SEIDM, BNC, CNCIS, STEEPLEBUSH, RG, BSS, DDIS, mixmaster, BCCI, BRGE, Europol, SARL, Military Intelligence, JICA, Scully, recondo, Flame, Infowar, FRU, Bubba, Freeh, Archives, ISADC, CISSP, Sundevil, jack, Investigation, JOTS, ISACA, NCSA, ASVC, spook words, RRF, 1071, Bugs Bunny, Verisign, Secure, ASIO, Lebed, ICE, NRO, Lexis-Nexis, NSCT, SCIF, FLiR, JIC, bce, Lacrosse, Flashbangs, HRT, IRA, EODG, DIA, USCOI, CID, BOP, FINCEN, FLETC, NIJ, ACC, AFSPC, BMDO, site, SASSTIXS, NAVWAN, NRL, RL, NAVWCWPNS, NSWC, USAFA, AHPCRC, ARPA, SARD, LABLINK, USACIL, SAPT, USCG, NRC, ~, O, NSA/CSS, CDC, DOE, SAAM, FMS, HPCC, NTIS, SEL, USCODE, CISE, SIRC, CIM, ISN, DJC, LLNL, bemd, SGC, UNCPCJ, CFC, SABENA, DREO, CDA, SADRS, DRA, SHAPE, bird dog, SACLANT, BECCA, DCJFTF, HALO, SC, TA SAS, Lander, GSM, T Branch, AST, SAMCOMM, HAHO, FKS, 868, GCHQ, DITSA, SORT, AMEMB, NSG, HIC, EDI, benelux, SAS, SBS, SAW, UDT, EODC, GOE, DOE, SAMF, GEO, JRB, 3P-HV, Masuda, Forte, AT, GIGN, Exon Shell, radint, MB, CQB, TECS, CONUS, CTU, RCMP, GRU, SASR, GSG-9, 22nd SAS, GEOS, EADA, SART, BBE, STEP, Echelon, Dictionary, MD2, MD4, MDA, diwn, 747, ASIC, 777, RDI, 767, MI5, 737, MI6, 757, Kh-11, EODN, SHS, ^X, Shayet-13, SADMS, Spetznaz, Recce, 707, CIO, NOCS, Halcon, NSS, Duress, RAID, Uziel, wojo, Psyops, SASCOM, grom, NSIRL, D-11, DF, ZARK, SERT, VIP, ARC, S.E.T. Team, NSWG, MP5k, SATKA, DREC, DEVGRP, DSD, FDM, GRU, LRTS, SIGDEV, NACSI, MEU/SOC,PSAC, PTT, RFI, ZL31, SIGDASYS, TDM. SUKLO, Schengen, SUSLO, TELINT, fake, TEXTA. ELF, LF, MF, Mafia, JASSM, CALCM, TLAM, Wipeout, GII, SIW, MEII, C2W, Burns, Tomlinson, Ufologico Nazionale, Centro, CICAP, MIR, Belknap, Tac, rebels, BLU-97 A/B, 007, nowhere.ch, bronze, Rubin, Arnett, BLU, SIGS, VHF, Recon, peapod, PA598D28, Spall, dort, 50MZ, 11Emc Choe, SATCOMA, UHF, The Hague, SHF, ASIO, SASP, WANK, Colonel, domestic disruption, 5ESS, smuggle, Z-200, 15kg, DUVDEVAN, RFX, nitrate, OIR, Pretoria, M-14, enigma, Bletchley Park, Clandestine, NSO, nkvd, argus, afsatcom, CQB, NVD, Counter Terrorism Security, Enemy of the State, SARA, Rapid Reaction, JSOFC3IP, Corporate Security, OSAll, 192.47.242.7, Baldwin, Wilma, ie.org, cospo.osis.gov, Police, Dateline, Tyrell, KMI, 1ee, Pod, 9705 Samford Road, 20755-6000, sniper, PPS, ASIS, ASLET, TSCM, Security Consulting, M-x spook, Z-150T, Steak Knife, High Security, Security Evaluation, Electronic Surveillance, MI-17, ISR, NSAS, Counterterrorism, real, spies, IWO, eavesdropping, debugging, CCSS, interception, COCOT, NACSI, rhost, rhosts, ASO, SETA, Amherst, Broadside, Capricorn, NAVCM, Gamma, Gorizont, Guppy, NSS, rita, ISSO, submiss, ASDIC, .tc, 2EME REP, FID, 7NL SBS, tekka, captain, 226, .45, nonac, .li, Tony Poe, MJ-12, JASON, Societ

    5. Re:Echelon spookwords list by Kronovohr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "White Yankee" should be "Yankee White", which is an old codeword for "for the president's eyes only"

    6. Re:Echelon spookwords list by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      "Security Consulting, M-x spook, Z-150T, Steak Knife,"

      Hahahaaa!!!

      *emacs*!

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    7. Re:Echelon spookwords list by NuclearDog · · Score: 1

      Findy 'Furby' in that list completely destroyed the very little amount of credibility it had.

      ND

      --
      This statement is forty-five characters long.
    8. Re:Echelon spookwords list by Tackhead · · Score: 2, Interesting
      > Findy 'Furby' in that list completely destroyed the very little amount of credibility it had.

      It also tells you roughly when that version of the list was created. Because Furbies contain embedded electronic devices, and because Furbies communicate with each other, they fell under the rules for bringing in portable electronic communications devices -- and were declared a no-no in secure areas. (Which makes sense; someone could hide a bug in a Furby and it would be nontrivial for the Furby owner or the security personnel to detect it on visual inspection.)

      The fact that I remember that story in the context of the word "Furby" and "the list", probably makes me a threat too.

      Here's an interesting game we could play someday: Flash every item on that list, one item per second, to the subject. Using {mumble, if it's not on the list, it's an old version of the list} technology, count the number of times the subject recognizes a term. The more keywords you recognize in the context of the list, the more of a potential threat you are.

      Even if the keywords are bogus, it indicates that you've been reading things you shouldn't. (Which would make for an interesting metagame: someone who hits on only the .mil/.gov keywords might be legit. Someone who hits on only the tinfoil keywords can be fed any disinformation you want. Someone who hits differently on the .mil/.gov keywords and the tinfoil keywords can be fed disinformation, and is potentially far more useful, but you've got to be doubly careful about what kinds of disinfo you feed him.)

  44. No way. by endersdouble · · Score: 1

    Pffff. Can't be right. Everyone knows Daedalus runs as a small piece of code on every device on the planet.

  45. Interesting question by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm curious, what Echelon can do with Freenet? Or SSH traffic? Or IPSex? Or SSL? Or GPG email? Does it work only on clear-text communication? I suppose not because that would be utterly foolish. With VoIP it's now trivial to have encrypted voice communication all over the world. What can Echelon do about such traffic?

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
    1. Re:Interesting question by The+Real+Chrisjc · · Score: 1

      Well, what do you think they'll do with it?
      Decrypt it of course!
      Whats to say that they havn't got the number-crunching technology to decrypt all of it (don't say its impossiable, just very difficult - for now!). Maybe they pay more attention to encrypted traffic because they think the people that use it have more to hide?
      If they can search through millions of phone-calls all the time, maybe they can do that decryption thing too?

    2. Re:Interesting question by arcade · · Score: 1

      Well, what do you think they'll do with it?
      Decrypt it of course!


      Not very likely. They need to have found major weaknesses in several algorithms to be able to do that.

      They can't do it brute force. That is not computationally feasable. Thus, they need to have found major weaknesses. The question is -- is there such major weaknesses?

      --
      "Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
    3. Re:Interesting question by Sanity · · Score: 1
      Not very likely. They need to have found major weaknesses in several algorithms to be able to do that.
      Which, while possible, is very unlikely (it would be the cryptography equivolent of finding a way to turn lead into gold).
    4. Re:Interesting question by arcade · · Score: 3, Informative

      Which, while possible, is very unlikely (it would be the cryptography equivolent of finding a way to turn lead into gold).

      Well, they _may_ have found a method to factor products of large primes more efficiently. There has been made major strides to that goal during the last ten years or so (or so it seems to me, a non-matematician).

      TWINKLE broke the 512bit RSA key. Bernstein has a proposal on how a machine could break a 1024bit key. For all we know, the NSA may have found better methods - which are able to factor 2048bit keys in a short timespan.

      How likely it is .. I've got no clue.

      However, what IS certain is that pure bruteforcing is out of the question. Whatever the paranoids may believe, not even the NSA sit on fast enough computers to break into a single SSH session if they use todays public knowledge on algorithms. Not even all the worlds computers combined would be able to break into such a session with reasonable time. Breaking into lots of them in parallell -- "yeah right".

      --
      "Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
    5. Re:Interesting question by chemguru · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Regarding VoIP... The government is working to broadband providers to include VoIP under CALEA (Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act). Essentially, providers must have provisions in place to wiretap VoIP traffic.

      I would ASSume that if there's hardware available to tap VoIP, Echelon could pick it up as well ( or MADE to tie into the same hardware {if it's not already} ).

      --
      --Chemguru
    6. Re:Interesting question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about weak implementation like using a rubbish PRNG?

    7. Re:Interesting question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know what IPSex is, but I want some! Is that like a new Internet chat thing or something?

    8. Re:Interesting question by Xilman · · Score: 1
      TWINKLE broke the 512bit RSA key. Bernstein has a proposal on how a machine could break a 1024bit key. For all we know, the NSA may have found better methods - which are able to factor 2048bit keys in a short timespan.

      Garbage.

      TWINKLE hasn't yet been built and, in its original form, probably never will be.

      The first known factorization of a 512-bit hard integer was performed by "The Cabal". As far as anyone knows, that integer (rsa-512) has never been used as the public modulus of an RSA key.

      The only 512-bit integer known to me to have been used as the public modulus of an RSA key and subsequently factored.is the stage-10 challenge in Simon Singh's The Codebook.

      Both of these numbers, and a couple more which are at least as big, were factored by the general number field sieve running on a collection of quite ordinary computer.

      I've already given you a goodly collection of keywords to type into a search engine, but the following may also be of use if you want to learn more: Lenstra, Montgomery, Franke, Leyland, "te Riele", CWI, "Simon Singh", Granlund, NFSNET, Shamir.

      Paul

      --
      Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate
    9. Re:Interesting question by TyrranzzX · · Score: 1

      Considering they already tap the internet traffic itself, I would imagine they could do it. The problem, however, is filtering that kind of traffic in any timely matter. Telephone conversations are one thing, considering all you need is to tie into the backbone lines, transport the data, hook up some analoge to digital converters, filter for voices and identify them for data (not hard to do with the right filtering, either), do a filter for syllables and beyond that, do whatever else you want to as far as database updating and searching is conserned externally. I certianly wouldn't see them storing every telephone conversation, but I can see them creating massive databases.

      Lets just say they could bring in data over the internet. First, you'd have gigabytes upon gigabytes of information, all of which is unrelated accept for the IP and TCP header information. You can tell where packets start and stop, and try to associate files with applications and thus, get some idea of what the data is, based on protocol information, but you sure as hell can't tell what the data is in any reliable manner without a massive, memory based system that could keep track of what internet applications are being run where. I can imagine some form of e-mail filtering (albiet, unreliable if someone wanted to attack it and knew the proper keywords) as well as hooking into large search engines such as google.

      Anyone with a bit of technical knowledge can probably figure out where the holes are and use them. As for breaking encryption, I certainly wouldn't be suprised if they could, but it's highly unlikely they've got a bunch of genuses sitting locked up in a bunker somewhere breaking encryption algorithms for them 24/7, much less a system that can efficiently break every heavily encrypted packet that comes through. Considering the level of paranoia these gooks have about not having information, I should think that they'd be pressing for laws and equipment to favor them, but with the internet as it is today, I don't particularily see them being able effectivly spy on a whole lot of jack shit.

    10. Re:Interesting question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm curious, what Echelon can do with [...] IPSex?

      Watch it, same as the rest of us.

    11. Re:Interesting question by Jack+Schitt · · Score: 1

      >...I don't particularily see them being able
      >effectivly spy on a whole lot of jack shit.

      Whoa, what'd I do? Why'd they want to spy on me?

      -Jack

      --
      This message brought to you by Jack Schitt's Previously Shat Shit
    12. Re:Interesting question by arcade · · Score: 1

      Garbage.

      TWINKLE hasn't yet been built and, in its original form, probably never will be.


      I stand corrected. I always thought it was a real machine, but after reading up on wikipedia, it turns out that wikipedia supports you - and I yield to both of you. :)

      As far as anyone knows, that integer (rsa-512) has never been used as the public modulus of an RSA key.

      I don't know RSA good enough, but I seem to remember a ruckus a year or two ago, where some certificates were given out with keys shorter than 512bits - I would think that was the public modulus of the key, but I'm not certain.

      I have, by the way, read The Codebook by Simon Singh, but I'm not a matematician.

      --
      "Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
  46. Code words / amatuers by silverhalide · · Score: 1

    I'd imagine this system would only catch / bring attention to small timers and reckless teenagers who probably don't pose much threat to the government. Any group that is serious about inflicting harm would probably meet in person and work out a simple code system to make their conversations slip through the cracks of this system (ie: "Monkey" for "President", "Birthday cake" for 'bomb', etc).

    1. Re:Code words / amatuers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, Echelon is only the logical conclusion to indolent Ameican intelligence agencies, in this case the NSA and CIA. Unlike the Mossad who actually take human intelligence seriously, and I'd argue have a heck of alot more success because of human intelligence gathering methods (good old fashioned spies on the ground).

      This is in contrast to the American way of intelligence gathering which is sitting back at Ft Mead listening for words like Allah, bomb, Bush, semtex, etc..to float by. When no terrorist worth his salt would be ignorant enough to use such terms. The only use a system like Echelon has is to spy on the regular unsophisticated masses (This includes spying for corporations not governments which is happening more and more), which I what I suspected was the plan to begin with.

      Because once serious terrorists figured out that Echelon existed the system instantly became useless for its stated goal. It's nothing but a massive drift net to catch the stupidest criminals, not to do any serious intelligence work with, but I'd expect nothing less from American Intelligence Agencies. American's just don't take intelligene gathering seriously because if they really used more efficient methods like the Mossad they'd become very very lethal to their enemies, but they're not so they're a joke and you have comical things like the CIA giving exploding cigars to Fidel Castro to bump him off, it's laughable.

    2. Re:Code words / amatuers by natefanaro · · Score: 1

      Great, now they're going to be watching those words like a hawk.

      Now what am I going to do when I want to buy my pet monkey a birthday cake?

  47. Good old defence signals directorate.... by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

    Ooh ooh I know this one, pick me pick me!!!

    Super computers live on the second floor. Xbranch use them probably more than anyone else, so they can kiss my fluffy backside because they wouldn't let me install a flight sim. So can DSD for that matter.

    They look like... Boxes. Big boxes. The modern ones must have had some wind tunnel mods 'cause the pipework looks real cool.

    I'm guessing - Building M-2-rightside if you are walking toward building N. If you know, you know right! Yes, I know about the basement as well.

  48. I wouldn't worry by roystgnr · · Score: 3, Funny

    If it ever does become sentient, it'll probably classify it's own creators as a terrorist organization and end up working with the good guys.

  49. I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how long it would take to compile gentoo on it!

  50. botnet by twitter · · Score: 1
    Here's to hoping it never becomes sentient.

    According to that scenerio, sentience would take additional resources provided by virus infected PCs, mobile phones, fax machines and .... oh no, it's Wince, Skynet is Wince, Ahhhh!

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:botnet by H09N0X10U5 · · Score: 0, Funny

      Skynet are a Belgian ISP and I assure you that there is absolutely no danger of them becoming sentient. Ever.

      --
      The post anonymously option you are [not] attempting to use is one that isn't available to your user.
    2. Re:botnet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Moderators: Please note that "twitter" is a known fanatical sycophant whose obnoxious offtopic rants are legend here on Slashdot. It doesn't matter what the topic is, he'll find a way to scrape in some pointless Microsoft bashing. While nobody expects us to love Microsoft in any way, his particularly tepid style of calling anyone he replies to "troll" or "liar" or "fanboy" because he happens to disagree with whatever they're saying is well documented and should not be rewarded. If anything, twitter is the type of person that should not be part of the open source/free software community. He is an anathema to all that is good about free software.

      I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider twitter and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Knoppix or Mepis or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.

      If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than twitter. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.

      To get an idea of what I'm talking about, check this post out. This is an article about email disclaimers. The parent of the post is complaining about the ads in the linked page and so on, and twitter actually goes off on a rant to blame it on Microsoft and recommend Lynx, because "is teh free".

      Here's another. In this post twitter not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "GNU". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +4) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.

      Here's that drive-by advocacy and FUD in motion: twitter goes on about some topic and then drops the usual "oh and M$ is teh evil" because "WMP phones home" or some such. Called on his FUD, he then claims that WMP stores every song and movie you've ever played in a file, somewhere. Pressed further, he just sort of slithers out of sight, his FUD-spreading complete. This is not about some Microsoft technology that nobody likes anyway; it's about lying for the sake of lying. Way too many of his posts are exactly like this one.

      More? Just read though this post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own. Or these two. Or this one. Or this one.

      Still not convinced? This is what twitter considers "humour" while going about his daily "M$" routine.

      M

  51. Re:nice article for guys who love Star Treck movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "to mislead people in believing that they can control everything"

    Probably not the purpose of Star Wars - it was more to force the Soviets into spending money they didn't have so that they would implode under the weight of their socialist economy. For 911, it was the fact that government employees ignored intellegence about the activities of the terrorists, rather then the technology not discovering the activities of the terrorists.

  52. techowld seems shlashdotted google isnt by cedspam · · Score: 1

    google web cache http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:http%3A%2F%2F www.techworld.com%2Fstorage%2Fnews%2Findex.cfm%3FN ewsID%3D2430

  53. Re:nice article for guys who love Star Treck movie by La+Gris · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why 9/11 could happen ? Maybe because someone inside US wanted this to happen in order to justify that war against terrorism, Irak and Afganistan. It was know by CIA and Echelon may have helped somehow but someone indeed, did not want to act against it to happen.

    --
    Léa Gris
  54. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wow...let's use our brains and think about this for 3 seconds. ok got it. it wouldn't be used for text matching, but signal processing? like maybe voice recognition?

  55. Re:Amazing by ezzzD55J · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Amazing indeed... Since when do you need floating point operations for text matching?!

    Not for text matching, but for numbercrunching. Numbercrunching as in RC5-72. I think you get the idea...

    Excuse me? floating point operations to run RC5? I don't think you get the idea..

  56. How Is it? by marktaw.com · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is it we can get exact specs for Echelon, but not for Google?

    1. Re:How Is it? by nusratt · · Score: 1

      "How is it we can get exact specs for Echelon, but not for Google?"

      1. Google hires smarter people.
      2. Google is a for-profit enterprise, and the power of money trumps everything else.

    2. Re:How Is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I wouldnt exactly call these "exact specs for echelon", as i read the article, while downplaying the rest of the system they are only responsible for a noise reduction unit, refering to the rest as "ordinairy server" and "system integrators".

      My gues is that the company in question had a couple to many asics produced for some potential goverment contract and now senses a change in political climate so they want to vent their expertise in this area in the hope of selling them of.
      Gotta love texas, right george?

    3. Re:How Is it? by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      One is a Government thing, the other is not.

    4. Re:How Is it? by Alsee · · Score: 1

      OMG! Echelon *is* Google!

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  57. echelon to slashdot /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rewson, SAFE, Waihopai, INFOSEC, ASPIC, MI6, Information Security, SAI, Information Warfare, IW, IS, Privacy, Information Terrorism, Terrorism Defensive Information, Defense Information Warfare, Offensive Information, Offensive Information Warfare, The Artful Dodger, NAIA, SAPM, ASU, ASTS, National Information Infrastructure, InfoSec, SAO, Reno, Compsec, JICS, Computer Terrorism, Firewalls, Secure Internet Connections, RSP, ISS, JDF, Ermes, Passwords, NAAP, DefCon V, RSO, Hackers, Encryption, ASWS, CUN, CISU, CUSI, M.A.R.E., MARE, UFO, IFO, Pacini, Angela, Espionage, USDOJ, NSA, CIA, S/Key, SSL, FBI, Secert Service, USSS, Defcon, Military, White House, Undercover, NCCS, Mayfly, PGP, SALDV, PEM, resta, RSA, Perl-RSA, MSNBC, bet, AOL, AOL TOS, CIS, CBOT, AIMSX, STARLAN, 3B2, BITNET, SAMU, COSMOS, DATTA, Furbys, E911, FCIC, HTCIA, IACIS, UT/RUS, JANET, ram, JICC, ReMOB, LEETAC, UTU, VNET, BRLO, SADCC, NSLEP, SACLANTCEN, FALN, 877, NAVELEXSYSSECENGCEN, BZ, CANSLO, CBNRC, CIDA, JAVA, rsta, Active X, Compsec 97, RENS, LLC, DERA, JIC, rip, rb, Wu, RDI, Mavricks, BIOL, Meta-hackers, ^?, SADT, Steve Case, Tools, RECCEX, Telex, Aldergrove, OTAN, monarchist, NMIC, NIOG, IDB, MID/KL, NADIS, NMI, SEIDM, BNC, CNCIS, STEEPLEBUSH, RG, BSS, DDIS, mixmaster, BCCI, BRGE, Europol, SARL, Military Intelligence, JICA, Scully, recondo, Flame, Infowar, FRU, Bubba, Freeh, Archives, ISADC, CISSP, Sundevil, jack, Investigation, JOTS, ISACA, NCSA, ASVC, spook words, RRF, 1071, Bugs Bunny, Verisign, Secure, ASIO, Lebed, ICE, NRO, Lexis-Nexis, NSCT, SCIF, FLiR, JIC, bce, Lacrosse, Flashbangs, HRT, IRA, EODG, DIA, USCOI, CID, BOP, FINCEN, FLETC, NIJ, ACC, AFSPC, BMDO, site, SASSTIXS, NAVWAN, NRL, RL, NAVWCWPNS, NSWC, USAFA, AHPCRC, ARPA, SARD, LABLINK, USACIL, SAPT, USCG, NRC, ~, O, NSA/CSS, CDC, DOE, SAAM, FMS, HPCC, NTIS, SEL, USCODE, CISE, SIRC, CIM, ISN, DJC, LLNL, bemd, SGC, UNCPCJ, CFC, SABENA, DREO, CDA, SADRS, DRA, SHAPE, bird dog, SACLANT, BECCA, DCJFTF, HALO, SC, TA SAS, Lander, GSM, T Branch, AST, SAMCOMM, HAHO, FKS, 868, GCHQ, DITSA, SORT, AMEMB, NSG, HIC, EDI, benelux, SAS, SBS, SAW, UDT, EODC, GOE, DOE, SAMF, GEO, JRB, 3P-HV, Masuda, Forte, AT, GIGN, Exon Shell, radint, MB, CQB, TECS, CONUS, CTU, RCMP, GRU, SASR, GSG-9, 22nd SAS, GEOS, EADA, SART, BBE, STEP, Echelon, Dictionary, MD2, MD4, MDA, diwn, 747, ASIC, 777, RDI, 767, MI5, 737, MI6, 757, Kh-11, EODN, SHS, ^X, Shayet-13, SADMS, Spetznaz, Recce, 707, CIO, NOCS, Halcon, NSS, Duress, RAID, Uziel, wojo, Psyops, SASCOM, grom, NSIRL, D-11, DF, ZARK, SERT, VIP, ARC, S.E.T. Team, NSWG, MP5k, SATKA, DREC, DEVGRP, DSD, FDM, GRU, LRTS, SIGDEV, NACSI, MEU/SOC,PSAC, PTT, RFI, ZL31, SIGDASYS, TDM. SUKLO, Schengen, SUSLO, TELINT, fake, TEXTA. ELF, LF, MF, Mafia, JASSM, CALCM, TLAM, Wipeout, GII, SIW, MEII, C2W, Burns, Tomlinson, Ufologico Nazionale, Centro, CICAP, MIR, Belknap, Tac, rebels, BLU-97 A/B, 007, nowhere.ch, bronze, Rubin, Arnett, BLU, SIGS, VHF, Recon, peapod, PA598D28, Spall, dort, 50MZ, 11Emc Choe, SATCOMA, UHF, The Hague, SHF, ASIO, SASP, WANK, Colonel, domestic disruption, 5ESS, smuggle, Z-200, 15kg, DUVDEVAN, RFX, nitrate, OIR, Pretoria, M-14, enigma, Bletchley Park, Clandestine, NSO, nkvd, argus, afsatcom, CQB, NVD, Counter Terrorism Security, Enemy of the State, SARA, Rapid Reaction, JSOFC3IP, Corporate Security, 192.47.242.7, Baldwin, Wilma, ie.org, cospo.osis.gov, Police, Dateline, Tyrell, KMI, 1ee, Pod, 9705 Samford Road, 20755-6000, sniper, PPS, ASIS, ASLET, TSCM, Security Consulting, M-x spook, Z-150T, Steak Knife, High Security, Security Evaluation, Electronic Surveillance, MI-17, ISR, NSAS, Counterterrorism, real, spies, IWO, eavesdropping, debugging, CCSS, interception, COCOT, NACSI, rhost, rhosts, ASO, SETA, Amherst, Broadside, Capricorn, NAVCM, Gamma, Gorizont, Guppy, NSS, rita, ISSO, submiss, ASDIC, .tc, 2EME REP, FID, 7NL SBS, tekka, captain, 226, .45, nonac, .li, Tony Poe, MJ-12, JASON, Society, Hmong, Majic, evil, zipgun, tax, bootleg, warez, TRV, ERV, rednoise, mindwar, nailbomb, VLF, ULF, Paperclip, Chatter, M

  58. 1TF eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they're telling us (the public) it's 1 TF, just imagine how fast it really is.

  59. You aren't paranoid by crovira · · Score: 1

    "We don't know if or when our conversations and other communications are monitored."

    You're best to assume that they are (and invent your own clear code,) and that your cel phone is also a GPS and can give your location away to a resolution less than the flying shrapnel of a missile.

    That's why you don't hear dick from Osama any more.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  60. economic espionage by SuperBanana · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You left out one major item. Economic espionage, which is why the EU investigated the program in the first place.

    A lot of european contractors kept finding themselves underbid or business stolen from them- when everything was secret and there was no explanation except eavesdropping. Further, it was only US businesses that seemed to benefit from this mysterious information-providing god.

  61. What about "codewords" by failedlogic · · Score: 1

    This begs the question though ...

    If a "terrorist" uses genreic words in their e-mail to decribe weapons or tactics then to cover all possibilities do they just monitor all e-mails and conversations of certain persons? Sure an Osama Bin Laden is on the list but what about some person they only "suspect" of terrorism.

  62. Really? by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 1

    How on Earth do they manage to get 3 billion warrants every day?!

    The second largest electronic network is an automated judge/court clerk system able to process and approve up to 3 billion warrants every day.

    Does it mean that I have less than 30 microseconds to appeal?

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
  63. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    good point. I wonder if there will ever be chips made with hundreds of integer only cores. For specialty situations like this it could speed it up quite a bit.

  64. Negative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The chair is against the wall.
    The chair is against the wall.

  65. secret sharers by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They're trying to spendour money as fast as possible, not save it. That's one reason that Echelon is secret. Until it becaue ludicrously futile to deny it, Echelon officially didn't exist. That makes it easier for huge corporate welfare projects to spend money on political bribers^Wcontributors' projects, without any oversight or criticism. Running up a $5T debt isn't easy with Congress and the public butting in all the time.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:secret sharers by mi · · Score: 1
      You are only upset, because they don't use Linux, aren't you... Just like Linux, whatever cheaper alternatives (hardware and software) may exist today, did not exist, when the system was designed and implemented.

      It was secret, not because it costs too much, but because the enemies weren't supposed to know about it. Or -- once the news trickled out -- they weren't supposed to know the exact capabilities. Duh...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    2. Re:secret sharers by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      What kind of irrelevant comment about Linux is that? I'm not upset, I'm just unhappy about being ripped off by the government for spying on my fellow countrymen for corporate profit six ways from sunday. The "enemies" have their own spy networks of tech and people, and of course know about Echelon. The "Intelligence community" keeps these systems secret from us to perpetuate exactly the kind of scam I've detailed, as proven by its existence as such. What exactly is *you* major malfunction, that you're apoligizing for these vampires?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:secret sharers by mi · · Score: 1
      What kind of irrelevant comment about Linux is that?

      That was a joke. Sorry.

      I'm not upset, I'm just unhappy about being ripped off by the government for spying on my fellow countrymen for corporate profit six ways from sunday.

      Echelon is not (supposed to be) used for internal intelligence gathering. Only to spy on foreigners. If you are one -- sorry. But then it ain't your money being spent.

      I don't mind corporate profit, and neither should you -- as long as your freedoms are not restricted, which they aren't -- not by Echelon, anyway. After all, corporations are owned by your fellow countrymen...

      The "enemies" have their own spy networks of tech and people, and of course know about Echelon.

      There is a lot to know about a system beyond "it exists".

      What do they know? Do they know, if the system processes all calls, or only some of them (like 10%)? Do they know, whether it can access wireless calls, and if so, which ones? Do they know, how good the software is and how powerful the hardware? Do they know, if it is enough to speak Ukrainian instead of Russian to confuse the system, or whether it is good enough to recognize the speaker whatever language?

      The "Intelligence community" keeps these systems secret from us to perpetuate exactly the kind of scam I've detailed, as proven by its existence as such.

      What scam? Have you ever tried to devise a system of such complexity? Of course, anything made by a government (space flights, tanks, healthcare, bread, TV) is more bloated and expensive than when made by private sector through free markets, but defense is something, I'm willing to see in government's hands.

      What exactly is *your* major malfunction, that you're apologizing for these vampires?

      What "vampires"? They certainly waste a lot of money. But for charges of "scam" to stick, there have to be grounds to suspect them of wasting knowingly for the purpose of enriching themselves. Can you prove that? Can you even hint at that? Can Michael Moore make a documentary about it? Oops...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    4. Re:secret sharers by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Echelon is used to spy on Americans. This entire subthread is about the closed, secret nature of the system that protects its operations as well as its budget. After the Europeans blew Echelon's cover, they merely denied its scope. Once that's blown, they'll merely deny its functions. Once that's blown, they'll hope that Congress has passed enough Patriot Acts and "National Intelligence Reform" acts to cover their domestic spying. If not, they'll rely on Echelon's global scope to exempt it from definitions of "domestic" spying, by either jurisdictional arguments about overseas operations or the traditional mutual backscratching between CIA and, for example, MI5 and the RCMP.

      That "knowingly deceptive" argument is too tired to get up for a political debate in America anymore. Corporations and governments don't "know" anything, they just do things. All that matters is whether the things they do cost us too much, in money or freedom. And whether these organizations are accountable for what they do. Echelon, its government oversight whose power it feeds and the vendor corporations whose profits it represents, is too secret for accountability, so it's bloated. Transparent government programs can operate more cheaply than these, because the profit is removed and the terms can be set firmly, without depending on the supply/revenue feedback for surviving transient pressures.

      We agree that some societal operations are better suited to government than corporations. By keeping Echelon closed, it's exploitable by its supplier corporations. Keeping its algorithms secret prevents the larger community of "good guys" from improving it, as well as keeping its improvements from feeding back into the American tech edge. It's a backwards combination of secrecy and corporate development that makes it both more expensive and less safe. And that's not very funny.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:secret sharers by mi · · Score: 1
      Echelon is used to spy on Americans.

      Do you have any pointers to back this up?

      By keeping Echelon closed, it's exploitable by its supplier corporations. Keeping its algorithms secret prevents the larger community of "good guys" from improving it, as well as keeping its improvements from feeding back into the American tech edge. It's a backwards combination of secrecy and corporate development that makes it both more expensive and less safe.

      This, unfortunately, is true for just about any defense project. There usually is some congressional oversight, but only by Congressmen/Senators with clearance, etc.

      Opening it up wider will, indeed, make it more accountable and thus cheaper, but will also release to our enemies more information about the system and its capabilities. Some of them may realize, they were listened to and switch addresses, phone numbers, and codes. Others may realize, they can lower their expenses because the system does not parse their tongue, or is incapable of intercepting faxes...

      Public accountability is almost always desirable. Except in some rarecases -- such as national defense.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  66. War Machine by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    This system would be better spent simulating the protein folding directed by the human genome, and releasing all the produced science to American citizens. Then the technology from both the infosystem and the biology could be harnessed by Americans to protect the US economically and biochemically, and extending that protection to the rest of our species through trade. Instead the fear of terrorism has been stoked so high that the Federal corporate welfare job security system is not only diverting our R&D money and brains away from productive work, it's spying on us in violation of the law and our open democracy.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  67. Tech by His+Eminence · · Score: 1

    With all that tech... why not make a server that can withstand a /.ing ?

  68. Echelon killed my father! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Roswell! Roswell!
    1984 could happen!

  69. Could not connect to JRun Server. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Server Error
    The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your request.

    Could not connect to JRun Server.

  70. You paid for the Echelon. Google is someone else's by dusanv · · Score: 1

    property.

  71. Re:Amazing by tenco · · Score: 1
    Not to run RC5, but to crack RC5. From the website I made "RC5-72" a link to in #10549995:

    Project: RC5-72
    The project to crack a message encrypted with the 72-bit RC5 cipher.
    I hope this clarifies my point.
  72. Do you remember when we used to say ... by nusratt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... right after 9/11:
    "The terrorists win only if they change us, only if they make us change who we are and how we live."

    By that standard, I'd say "Game Over".

    1. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by Moderatbastard · · Score: 0
      "The terrorists win only if they change us, only if they make us change who we are and how we live."

      By that standard, I'd say "Game Over".

      Huh? Nobody's stopped me drinking beer and eating bacon, and I regularly see chicks walking down the street without tents & ninja masks on.
      --
      1/3 of jokes get modded OT. If you get the joke, mod 1 in 3 insightful/interesting/underrated to restore karma balance.
    2. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by gone.fishing · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unfortunately, I think I agree. If I were Osama Bin Laden, I'd be amazed at the return on my investment. I really very much doubt that he expected even 10% of the results that he got.

      He has won in more ways than he ever imagined. His legacy will be that he managed to make the free world less free. But when you think about it, he was only the catalyst. His timing was perfect, George W. Bush accomplished more of this than Osama did. It could even be argued that George W. Bush has made Osama his puppet to help him achieve specific political goals.

      More than once I've wondered if fifty years from now, we will learn that the government had fore-knowlege of this like they did of Pearl Harbor. I certainaly hope not but can not discount it as a possibility. Our history shows that it was done before. I'd like to think that this is impossible but I can't.

      If some day we learn that some in government knew and took no action to protect a state secret, I'll view them in the same light that I view Bin Laden and Hitler.

    3. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put down the conspiracy bong please.... It definitely needs a good cleaning.

    4. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by awehttam · · Score: 1
      I think "they" will have ultimately won when "we" (well, Americans in particular but also the rest of the western world) start our own civil wars and effectively tie up our resources to stay the hell out of "their" world.

      Just another reason why we need to resolve our issues democratically and peacefully than going out and getting a gun.

    5. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by EddWo · · Score: 1

      Is that really what you think the issue is? That the terrorists want to convert all of America to Islam? If so I think you are sorely mistaken.

      --
      "Taligent is still pure vapor. Maybe they'll be the last who jumps up on Openstep... "
    6. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bin laden does not want to change america.

      he doesnt have any goals besides DESTROYING america.

      that is it, he wants us dead, not changed.

      dead.

      he uses a few excuses to justify a holy war, but in the end, it is that he hates america and wants to destroy it. he doesnt give a shit about our freedom or if it changes. he wants you, your parents, your bros/sisters all dead.

    7. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, did you miss out when brains were being distributed. You should check with UPS, they might still have yours floating around.

    8. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Osama doesn't give a rat's ass about our freedom or the US government's conformance to its constitution. We are 5000 miles away from him. He has local political objectives in the middle east, he wins when those are met - when islamofascist thugs control the whole place. By _that_ standard his ROI is pretty damned negative, which is a good thing for us, because 911 was a prototype, a probe to see how we'd react, before bringing out the nukes. The fact that the US is on an ass-kicking rampage over only 3000 deaths sends a signal to all these shitheads that when Wall Street is turned into a quarter mile wide crater, they won't win a damned thing. That's an incentive for them to keep the dogs on leash.

    9. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by BeaverCleaver · · Score: 1

      Anybody remember a crap TV show called "The Lone Gunmen?" They had episode which aired on Australian TV (it wasn't an Australian show though, it was American like everything else on Aussie TV) in late August 2001, where some terrorists were paid by a political agency to crash a plane into the World Trade Center in order that Congress would be scared into passing some bill. I think that was the basic plot, anyway it seemed like amazing timing. I wonder if the show's writers later got dragged into vans and taken to a basement somewhere for a session with the rubber hoses and genital-electrodes?

    10. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sigh. Another one who thinks America is the whole world, or the only bit that matters - and that from an apparent liberal too. Maybe that's why the rest of the world hate you?

    11. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by nusratt · · Score: 1

      "Nobody's stopped me drinking beer and eating bacon"

      So many responders missed my point, that I obviously was sloppy and too brief in making it.

      I was responding to "gone.fishing(213219)" who said:
      "I do value my rights and my privacy... I fear a repressive regime in my own country...
      changes made since 9/11 have made the way we live, the way we travel, and the way we do business much more restrictive... We aren't anonymous travelers anymore... We are electronically monitored, our travels documented... A regime that turns it's military against it's own people isn't very far from being the enemy... It is just wrong... I'm afraid that we already have our own version of secret police."

      For responders who complained of my post being USA-centric, I think it's pretty clear that "gone.fishing(213219)" (to whom I was responding) was posting from that perspective.

      I agree with the observations made by "gone.fishing(213219)", and I see all of these observations as example of ways in which terrorists have changed us after 9/11.

      These examples are EXACTLY what people meant when they said that terrorists win only if they make us change who we are.
      When people said that terrorists win only if they make us change how we live, they WEREN'T referring to the idea of terrorists forcing us to adopt Islamic fundamentalist religious beliefs, or to agree with the rightness of their related political practices.

      Events which weren't the norm before 9/11:
      -- Abu Ghraib
      -- Guantanamo, where people are held with no limits on how long they can he held without access to outside assistance or even disclosure of their identities.
      -- secret warrantless searches of our homes, library records, and all the other excesses of the Patriot Act.
      -- CAPPS, violation of EU privacy principles, secret seizure of US airlines records.
      etc., etc., etc. ...

      For responders who thought I was saying that terrorists' actions derive from a hatred of the MERE IDEA of "western" democracy/liberty -- that's not what I meant.
      Those terrorists MAY in fact feel that way, but I happen to agree with the responder who said that those feelings are NOT the terrorists' PRIMARY motivation.
      And I happen to believe that none of this would be happening if we never had troops in Islamic countries.
      BUT even though I DO happen to believe these things, those beliefs AREN'T the subject I was discussing.

      I deplore the anti-democratic developments described by "gone.fishing(213219)" -- but EVEN IF YOU DON'T, I think you must agree that they demonstrate that 9/11 has succeeded in reducing the liberties, privacy, and tolerance which we formerly expected and experienced.

    12. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by nusratt · · Score: 1

      "Is that really what you think the issue is? That the terrorists want to convert all of America to Islam?"

      So many responders missed my point, that I obviously was sloppy and too brief in making it.

      I was responding to "gone.fishing(213219)" who said:
      "I do value my rights and my privacy... I fear a repressive regime in my own country...
      changes made since 9/11 have made the way we live, the way we travel, and the way we do business much more restrictive... We aren't anonymous travelers anymore... We are electronically monitored, our travels documented... A regime that turns it's military against it's own people isn't very far from being the enemy... It is just wrong... I'm afraid that we already have our own version of secret police."

      For responders who complained of my post being USA-centric, I think it's pretty clear that "gone.fishing(213219)" (to whom I was responding) was posting from that perspective.

      I agree with the observations made by "gone.fishing(213219)", and I see all of these observations as example of ways in which terrorists have changed us after 9/11.

      These examples are EXACTLY what people meant when they said that terrorists win only if they make us change who we are.
      When people said that terrorists win only if they make us change how we live, they WEREN'T referring to the idea of terrorists forcing us to adopt Islamic fundamentalist religious beliefs, or to agree with the rightness of their related political practices.

      Events which weren't the norm before 9/11:
      -- Abu Ghraib
      -- Guantanamo, where people are held with no limits on how long they can he held without access to outside assistance or even disclosure of their identities.
      -- secret warrantless searches of our homes, library records, and all the other excesses of the Patriot Act.
      -- CAPPS, violation of EU privacy principles, secret seizure of US airlines records.
      etc., etc., etc. ...

      For responders who thought I was saying that terrorists' actions derive from a hatred of the MERE IDEA of "western" democracy/liberty -- that's not what I meant.
      Those terrorists MAY in fact feel that way, but I happen to agree with the responder who said that those feelings are NOT the terrorists' PRIMARY motivation.
      And I happen to believe that none of this would be happening if we never had troops in Islamic countries.
      BUT even though I DO happen to believe these things, those beliefs AREN'T the subject I was discussing.

      I deplore the anti-democratic developments described by "gone.fishing(213219)" -- but EVEN IF YOU DON'T, I think you must agree that they demonstrate that 9/11 has succeeded in reducing the liberties, privacy, and tolerance which we formerly expected and experienced.

    13. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by nusratt · · Score: 1

      "Sigh. Another one who thinks America is the whole world"

      So many responders missed my point, that I obviously was sloppy and too brief in making it.

      I was responding to "gone.fishing(213219)" who said:
      "I do value my rights and my privacy... I fear a repressive regime in my own country...
      changes made since 9/11 have made the way we live, the way we travel, and the way we do business much more restrictive... We aren't anonymous travelers anymore... We are electronically monitored, our travels documented... A regime that turns it's military against it's own people isn't very far from being the enemy... It is just wrong... I'm afraid that we already have our own version of secret police."

      For responders who complained of my post being USA-centric, I think it's pretty clear that "gone.fishing(213219)" (to whom I was responding) was posting from that perspective.

      I agree with the observations made by "gone.fishing(213219)", and I see all of these observations as example of ways in which terrorists have changed us after 9/11.

      These examples are EXACTLY what people meant when they said that terrorists win only if they make us change who we are.
      When people said that terrorists win only if they make us change how we live, they WEREN'T referring to the idea of terrorists forcing us to adopt Islamic fundamentalist religious beliefs, or to agree with the rightness of their related political practices.

      Events which weren't the norm before 9/11:
      -- Abu Ghraib
      -- Guantanamo, where people are held with no limits on how long they can he held without access to outside assistance or even disclosure of their identities.
      -- secret warrantless searches of our homes, library records, and all the other excesses of the Patriot Act.
      -- CAPPS, violation of EU privacy principles, secret seizure of US airlines records.
      etc., etc., etc. ...

      For responders who thought I was saying that terrorists' actions derive from a hatred of the MERE IDEA of "western" democracy/liberty -- that's not what I meant.
      Those terrorists MAY in fact feel that way, but I happen to agree with the responder who said that those feelings are NOT the terrorists' PRIMARY motivation.
      And I happen to believe that none of this would be happening if we never had troops in Islamic countries.
      BUT even though I DO happen to believe these things, those beliefs AREN'T the subject I was discussing.

      I deplore the anti-democratic developments described by "gone.fishing(213219)" -- but EVEN IF YOU DON'T, I think you must agree that they demonstrate that 9/11 has succeeded in reducing the liberties, privacy, and tolerance which we formerly expected and experienced.

    14. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by nusratt · · Score: 1

      "bin laden doesnt have any goals besides DESTROYING america. he wants us dead, not changed."

      So many responders missed my point, that I obviously was sloppy and too brief in making it.

      I was responding to "gone.fishing(213219)" who said:
      "I do value my rights and my privacy... I fear a repressive regime in my own country...
      changes made since 9/11 have made the way we live, the way we travel, and the way we do business much more restrictive... We aren't anonymous travelers anymore... We are electronically monitored, our travels documented... A regime that turns it's military against it's own people isn't very far from being the enemy... It is just wrong... I'm afraid that we already have our own version of secret police."

      For responders who complained of my post being USA-centric, I think it's pretty clear that "gone.fishing(213219)" (to whom I was responding) was posting from that perspective.

      I agree with the observations made by "gone.fishing(213219)", and I see all of these observations as example of ways in which terrorists have changed us after 9/11.

      These examples are EXACTLY what people meant when they said that terrorists win only if they make us change who we are.
      When people said that terrorists win only if they make us change how we live, they WEREN'T referring to the idea of terrorists forcing us to adopt Islamic fundamentalist religious beliefs, or to agree with the rightness of their related political practices.

      Events which weren't the norm before 9/11:
      -- Abu Ghraib
      -- Guantanamo, where people are held with no limits on how long they can he held without access to outside assistance or even disclosure of their identities.
      -- secret warrantless searches of our homes, library records, and all the other excesses of the Patriot Act.
      -- CAPPS, violation of EU privacy principles, secret seizure of US airlines records.
      etc., etc., etc. ...

      For responders who thought I was saying that terrorists' actions derive from a hatred of the MERE IDEA of "western" democracy/liberty -- that's not what I meant.
      Those terrorists MAY in fact feel that way, but I happen to agree with the responder who said that those feelings are NOT the terrorists' PRIMARY motivation.
      And I happen to believe that none of this would be happening if we never had troops in Islamic countries.
      BUT even though I DO happen to believe these things, those beliefs AREN'T the subject I was discussing.

      I deplore the anti-democratic developments described by "gone.fishing(213219)" -- but EVEN IF YOU DON'T, I think you must agree that they demonstrate that 9/11 has succeeded in reducing the liberties, privacy, and tolerance which we formerly expected and experienced.

    15. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by nusratt · · Score: 1

      "Wow, did you miss out when brains were being distributed."

      So many responders missed my point, that I obviously was sloppy and too brief in making it.

      I was responding to "gone.fishing(213219)" who said:
      "I do value my rights and my privacy... I fear a repressive regime in my own country...
      changes made since 9/11 have made the way we live, the way we travel, and the way we do business much more restrictive... We aren't anonymous travelers anymore... We are electronically monitored, our travels documented... A regime that turns it's military against it's own people isn't very far from being the enemy... It is just wrong... I'm afraid that we already have our own version of secret police."

      For responders who complained of my post being USA-centric, I think it's pretty clear that "gone.fishing(213219)" (to whom I was responding) was posting from that perspective.

      I agree with the observations made by "gone.fishing(213219)", and I see all of these observations as example of ways in which terrorists have changed us after 9/11.

      These examples are EXACTLY what people meant when they said that terrorists win only if they make us change who we are.
      When people said that terrorists win only if they make us change how we live, they WEREN'T referring to the idea of terrorists forcing us to adopt Islamic fundamentalist religious beliefs, or to agree with the rightness of their related political practices.

      Events which weren't the norm before 9/11:
      -- Abu Ghraib
      -- Guantanamo, where people are held with no limits on how long they can he held without access to outside assistance or even disclosure of their identities.
      -- secret warrantless searches of our homes, library records, and all the other excesses of the Patriot Act.
      -- CAPPS, violation of EU privacy principles, secret seizure of US airlines records.
      etc., etc., etc. ...

      For responders who thought I was saying that terrorists' actions derive from a hatred of the MERE IDEA of "western" democracy/liberty -- that's not what I meant.
      Those terrorists MAY in fact feel that way, but I happen to agree with the responder who said that those feelings are NOT the terrorists' PRIMARY motivation.
      And I happen to believe that none of this would be happening if we never had troops in Islamic countries.
      BUT even though I DO happen to believe these things, those beliefs AREN'T the subject I was discussing.

      I deplore the anti-democratic developments described by "gone.fishing(213219)" -- but EVEN IF YOU DON'T, I think you must agree that they demonstrate that 9/11 has succeeded in reducing the liberties, privacy, and tolerance which we formerly expected and experienced.

    16. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by Moderatbastard · · Score: 0
      I was responding to "gone.fishing(213219)"
      So why did you attach it to mine, 'loid?
      --
      1/3 of jokes get modded OT. If you get the joke, mod 1 in 3 insightful/interesting/underrated to restore karma balance.
    17. Re:Do you remember when we used to say ... by Moderatbastard · · Score: 0
      So many responders missed my point, that I obviously was sloppy and too brief in making it.
      Brief? You posted it at least twice, and yet you get modded up. Retarded and redundant.
      --
      1/3 of jokes get modded OT. If you get the joke, mod 1 in 3 insightful/interesting/underrated to restore karma balance.
  73. Re:"Oh Canada" soon to be banned in Canada... by Edie+O'Teditor · · Score: 1
    Canada criminalized "hate speech" including the Holy Bible.
    Yeah, but it's Cananda they're talking about. Odd, I always thought it was a card game, or some yucky thing girlies get in their toilet parts, but there you go - live and learn.
    --
    If X is the new Y, and Y is "X is the new Y", solve for X.
  74. Echelon fun .. by RedLaggedTeut · · Score: 3, Funny

    Echelon, among other stuff, is supposed to snoop on telecommunication networks.

    For example, matching voice patterns, it will alert the CIA every time someone utters 'Ana raicha al quaeda' in arabic.

    This has been known to cause too many alerts at a time when an earthquake caused a colera epidemic, which caused many arabs to go to the 'sit' (quaeda) frequently.

    Echelon has been critizised in the far dull past to lack overlook and control of who enters keywords, so the public wouldn't know whether it has been used to do some really cool insider trading on the stock markets.

    Usually, however, the keyword 'echelon' just evokes paranoia on the minds of european business top executives and serves to cover up human intelligence gathered or made up by the president himself at the dinner table. Or so I heard.

    --
    I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
    1. Re:Echelon fun .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Score: -!, Joke Flew Over Head

    2. Re:Echelon fun .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no its not the CIA

      it would be the NSA.

      the CIA doesnt handle that stuff directly. the NSA does it for them

  75. Yeah, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it play Ogg?

  76. The fourth amendment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful


    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


    Violating my fourth amendment rights and eroding my civil liberties is a much greater threat to my national security than any WMD is.

    I read something everyday that makes me want to quit being an American.

    1. Re:The fourth amendment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and the worst thing about echelon is that Canada is in on it too!
      Viva Mexico!

    2. Re:The fourth amendment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Violating my fourth amendment rights and eroding my civil liberties is a much greater threat to my national security than any WMD is."

      Perhaps, but you inspire a good point: is it legal for the American government to enter into a treaty that permits non-Americans to violate the fourth amendment, when the person whose rights are being violated resides within the US?

      Also, if communications are intercepted on US owned telcom equipment within US territory, and there is no specific wire tap or extradition warrant against the person affected, what right does the US have to pass the intercepts to other countries for analysis? Does this matter, since as the article point out the actual analysis is done in Texas (which means the US constitution should still apply)?

      The constitution garantees your right to privacy subject to proper legal proceeding, no sub-clauses, no exceptions. A government that fails to protect (and, in fact actively encourages the invasion of) the privacy of it's citizens from other countries is no less guilty of violating the constiution that the countries it is working with.

  77. FBI/CIA by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    *Automated*

    You will be contacted by the FBI. Our websearch as detected dubious information which has been called into question. Please remain where you are and we will contact you shortly.

    --end of line.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  78. Re:Amazing by ezzzD55J · · Score: 2, Informative
    Not to run RC5, but to crack RC5. From the website I made "RC5-72" a link to in #10549995:

    Project: RC5-72 The project to crack a message encrypted with the 72-bit RC5 cipher.

    I hope this clarifies my point.

    Not very much. Because

    • In this (unsophisticated) case, cracking == running (as they're brute forcing the key)
    • Linked from the very page you linked to, the FAQ entry:
      Why doesn't an FPU make my computer crack RC5-72 faster?

      RC5 involves a large number of integer additions, rotates and XORs. It doesn't require floating point calculations and won't, in general, benefit from them. There has been quite a lot of recent discussion on whether or not it might be possible to boost keyrates (on x86 architectures at least) by taking advantage of the fact that there are separate pipelines for integer and floating point instructions. (We leave it to the reader to figure out how to do floating-point XORs and rotates!)

      Which was my original remark to back up someone you followed up to with this:
      Amazing indeed... Since when do you need floating point operations for text matching?!

      Not for text matching, but for numbercrunching. Numbercrunching as in RC5-72 [distributed.net]. I think you get the idea...

    I hope it's clear now.. :)
  79. That's not really an argument by AllenChristopher · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm going to sell you this elephant charm. It will protect you from wild elephants, and you can be sure it works! Do you see any elephants around here?

    1. Re:That's not really an argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, that's far more provable than if Echelon (the existance of which the US Govn. probably still denies) has prevented more attacks...

    2. Re:That's not really an argument by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      If you had one on the savannah, and there were continually no elephants around you, then yes, I might buy one.

      if you lived in the ghetto, and tried to convince me the very large gun you carried openly prevents muggings, you might be on to something.

      Things actually can be prevented, you know.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    3. Re:That's not really an argument by CoyoteGuy · · Score: 1

      Hello, would you like to buy some premium volcano insurance.
      Uh, we live in New England. There hasn't been a volcano here for like 50 million years.
      Then you're a little over due for one, wouldn't you say?
      Touche, Salesman

      --
      Slashdot.. Land of nerds, trolls, and FlameBait..
    4. Re:That's not really an argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why is it _illegal_ for _me_ to read my neighbors mail? After all, *they* could be terrorists so I have every right to tap their phone lines and read their email. I should also read their email just in case they are trying to contact foreign terrorists!

      It's a bullshit argument, and you're not going to prevent anything by spying on your own citizens. Once again after WW2 and the Cuban Missle Crisis, our government found false safety in the fact that we are so far away from the rest of the world. As a result, they began relying on technology instead of relying on people.

      Agents reported the 9/11 senario as a vulnerability and it was ignored, this was reported a long time ago right after 9/11 happened and it was being investigated. It happens in a lot of other places too, you've got to get some computer to validate your data, even though you're the engineer, a machine has to O.K. it.

      This Echelon system is nothing more than a way for the government to spy on it's own citizens, and as this government and many of it's uneducated citizens become increasingly facist and nationalist each day, systems like this have an increasing likely hood of abuse.

      Things can be prevented, but we'll prevent them a lot faster by changing our foreign policy. We created the state of israel. We support the state of israel. Israel and Palestine have been at war for over half a century. This is where much of the animosity towards the USA comes from. The Israeli's and the Palestinians are commiting terrorist acts, and we support the israeli terrorism.

      There are other factors as well, especially with regards to Osama Bin Laden, who we trained and armed (then we took sides, with the shah and opposed him. He did not approve of the way his country was leveraging oil, and he sought to overthrow the shah. etc etc etc, we stopped him, he hates us.)

      I suggest that you go read up about world history for the past fifty years, otherwise you're just another dumb uneducated fool who listens to what the faces on the news tell them.

      We created these problems, they are attacking us for a legitimate reason, although we don't hold their tactics to be legitimate, in fact they are quite disgusting. Regardless, their attacks took none of our freedom, our REACTION to their attacks is what has limited our freedom.

      If you don't mind, then I suggest you foward a copy of all your conversations to the FBI for review.

    5. Re:That's not really an argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're confused on several key points regarding bin Laden and Israel.

  80. Re: more and more terrifying by ralphcringely · · Score: 1
    The world is more and more ...

    Not because the world is changing. Because you're learning about it.

    --
    Tell me again, who knew Mary was a virgin, and how did they know?
  81. It is that amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Some simple math shows that it IS impresive

    The 1 Tflops statistic is for a set of 5 rack-mount units, each 3U high. Essentially half a rack of equipment. Presumably, they would buy more than one set. In fact, one person suggeted that ASICs only make sense when purchased in quantities of 100k. With 24 ASICs per box, and 120 per 5-units, that's 1200 ASICs per full rack.

    If they order 100 racks, you get 100k ASICs, and 100 TFlops of processing power.

    THAT is impressive.

  82. Re:Echelon? Easily avoided by Kronovohr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    actually, you've pretty much hit the nail right on the head.

    There's one program out there that turns a normal message into a spam message based on the textual content, and can be decoded by running it through the same program. However, this doesn't go far enough to a degree -- if you create such a message, there's only one way to distribute it effectively and subversively, as to not be detected and your agent compromised:

    spam.

    Simple steps:

    1. Make certain your recipient has tens or hundreds of low-profile email accounts on every free mail provider out there
    2. Craft your message as spam using a predetermined sequence, or use a one-time pad which the recipient has on hand that the return message will look like spam
    3. Create dummy websites that contain order information for the product(s) you're selling, and actually sell something -- the subversive can effectively use this as a side phishing tool
    4. Purchase several "100 TRILLION EMAIL ADDRESSES!@!@!@! $29.95!@!!!!!@" CDs, and scrape USENET and websites for email addresses
    5. Each time, use a different spam relay
    6. Spam every email in the list, including your recipients

    From this, the message is completely lost in noise, and is theoretically disregarded...with all the spammers out there, the noise volume is enormous.

    The only problem with this scenario is that your recipients have no measures to contact you again, but you can set up a web log or forum where you talk about kittens or someshit and they'll be able to place padded messages back, or whatever you want to do.

    Now -- hopefully, if the national governments hadn't thought about this before, we'll see a "war on spam" where they'll drop a few bunker busters on a few spammers out there :D

  83. Echelon in the late 1970's by cohomology · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the late 1970's I worked for a defense contractor that built specialized signal processing computers. The NSA was a major customer. We tried to find other applications, like oil and gas exploration, but nobody else was buying.

    My job was to write microcode assemblers and then write the microcode that handled I/O. My description of the hardware is here.

    Up to 24 voice grade channels (8K samples per second each) arrived time and/or frequency multiplexed onto a single data channel. The system detected the presence of the subchannels, determined the type of modulation being used, and ran them through the appropriate demodulator algorithm. I don't know what happened to the data after that.

    We didn't use custom chips. A cabinet full of Schottky MSI chips was enough for a three processor system. The system's speed was due to parallelism, not high clock rate.

    By the way, one of our computer rooms was built inside a big metal box that was suspended from the roof on cables. When it mattered, all external connections except for power were unplugged. We were too cheap to pay for a shielded air-conditioning system, so tests lasted a maximum of 20 minutes.

    --
    Don't mess with The Phone Company. Piss them off and you'll be using two tin cans and a piece of string.
  84. Someone just crashed Echelon! by gone.fishing · · Score: 1

    Overflow...System Halted

  85. LEARN HOW TO HYPERLINK YOU FUCKING MORON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    rpiquepa
    Preferences
    Subscribe
    Journal
    Logout

    Sections
    Main
    Apache
    1 more
    Apple
    AskSlashdot
    2 more
    Books
    BSD
    3 more
    Developers
    6 more
    Games
    7 more
    Interviews
    IT
    3 more
    Linux
    2 more
    Politics
    6 more
    Science
    3 more
    YRO

    Help
    FAQ
    Bugs

    Stories
    Old Stories
    Old Polls
    Topics
    Hall of Fame
    Submit Story

    About
    Supporters
    Code
    Awards

    Services
    Broadband
    PriceGrabber
    Product Guide
    Special Offers
    Tech Jobs
    IT Research

  86. Twitter: Life and times of a petulant cock-gobbler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Twitter, you're a petulant cock-gobbling sycophant to Linux Torvaldyos! Quit taking DP from ESR and RMS's feculent cocks and why don't you try to stop sucking quite so much? Get out of your parents' basement and see the real world - maybe then you'll see how pathetic you sound, with your neverending stream of bullshit about how Microsoft is stalking you. Wasn't it you who said that Microsoft believes your insane ranting is actually a threat to them, so they PAY PEOPLE to reply to you on Slashdot? No sir, I don't get any money. I do it for the love. Someone has to go up against your paranoid whining. So get back in your cage and shut the fuck up already.

  87. how long? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, the system has put us out of work. By us I mean legions of programmers. How long before we organize & strike back at the system? How long before we exact revenge on the system that used us & then tossed us out with the garbage? I see some of the best minds in Amerika pumping gas & waiting tables, while Hapu Nahasapidapedalam & friends laugh all the way to the bank. How long?

  88. Obligatory question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it running Linux?

  89. Very helpful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Server Error
    The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your request.

    Could not connect to JRun Server."

    I was supposed to test JRun to run our high-volume server. Not anymore.

  90. And the interesting answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It can't do anything, since Echelon is about simple pattern matching to spoken voice and written text.

    The big idea is to control the "subversive" elements of your own government and people, to keep the status quo and avoid surprises such as uprisings.

  91. One of the Founding Fathers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those who give up liberty for the sake of security deserve neither liberty nor security.

    --- Ben Franklin

  92. One minor detail... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    A former inteligence officer was my mentor in highschool. Although details are skechy about his involvment in Echelon, much of the facts presented in this /. thread thus far, are basically correct.

    The area most people overlook is that the NSA/CIA/DoD wherever possible buy normal, everyday PC hardware. e.g Mac xServe G5s

    The other detail is that since the original Echelon was created, hardware has improved exponentially. A Dual Xeon with 16 GB of RAM is available today, far cheaper than these RAMSAN unit.

    Also, It is also believed that NSA programmers have contributed to the linux kernel. They probably have as many Linux servers as google does, if not more. The 'smoking gun' came during an informal chat with a friend who said kernel patches that originated at the NSA, which were contributed to the kernel under GPL ended up in SCO Unix.

    1. Re:One minor detail... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Also, It is also believed that NSA programmers have contributed to the linux kernel.

      Was "believed" put in there because somebody wants it to sound Really Scary(TM) because it's "believed" rather than "publicly known", or was it put in there because somebody was unaware of SELinux?

    2. Re:One minor detail... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (I also posted above http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=125980&cid =10551978)

      I am well aware of SELinux. I was referring to the standard linux kernel, I say "believed" because the NSA programmers didn't put "kernel.hacker@nsa.gov" on their patch/contribution, and make their NSA status public.

      A major area of interest for these programmers is in SMP & the kernel memory managment.

      And no, to my knowledge - there is no backdoor in linux as a result of those contributions.

      Tbere was a joking going around about the NSA secretly putting a backdoor in Windows, but they decided it wasn't necessary as microsoft seem to create backdoors into windows all by themselves.

  93. Re:Echelon? Easily avoided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't you just use the Usenet? No detection, but less collateral damage...

  94. Re:Echelon? Easily avoided by debrain · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A classic example of Steganography. The more noise, the easier to encode a useful signal. Usenet, radio signals, newspapers, and ebay are all great candidates for hidden messages. Cable television isn't such a great candidate only because it's highly regulated by either media conglomerates or governments.

  95. miniaturization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like this idea - miniaturization of morons. Only we would have to follow through and step on them.

  96. Re:Echelon? Easily avoided by Kronovohr · · Score: 1

    USENET would be great, but on local servers, they can track IPs viewing each item (yeah, yeah, I know...proxies). The problem involved is that with USENET, there has to be a pre-specified set of newsgroups, and they have to go to a remote server and fetch them, as opposed to just opening your mailbox and getting all sorts of junk sent right to your door inconspicuously.

    Besides -- with all the normal stuff that goes on on USENET, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't watched very closely already for any suspicious patterns. Email volume allows you to hide something in the midst of more junk in one week than all the USENET connections can dump in a year.

  97. mod parent up by Ernesto+Alvarez · · Score: 1

    That's how an early version of netscape's ssl was broken.

    Please mod the AC up a little bit.

  98. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In fact, the TMS systems are not used for cracking encryption at all. They are used on the front end of the data processing, to generate coherent messages for further processing. The TMS chips are not overly useful for number crunching (although they can run integers although slower). The most important thing for number crunching on goverment systems is to compute the number of '1's in a given data vector. The chips in the systems here do not do that very effeciently.

    Instead, the SAM systems are used to perform FFTs on data aquired via various input sources (sat, ground stations, microwave intercepts, etc.). FFTs use floating point ops. The output of the FFTs allows signals to have background noise and other data stripped out, and more easily align individual signals (including frequency variable) to be isolated for further processing.

  99. I live next door by kiwirob · · Score: 1

    I love next door to one of the Echelon site located in the Waihopai Valley in Marlborough, New Zealand.

    A while after the 911 thing the base had an open day for neighbours to come and have a look through the place. That is the places they allowed us to look at which wasn't too much. They served up nice tea and cakes too :)

    The idea I think was to get all the people on neighbouring properties to be on the look out for any unusual activity and let them know if anything happens.

    Here is a link to a picture of our very own Echelon spy base.

    http://kai.iks-jena.de/bilder/waihopai.jpg

    I got to go inside the Big golf ball on the left in the picture.

    1. Re:I live next door by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes If i were you I would love next door too! 9/11 wasn't a thing, it was an event and an important one, america isn't safe anymore by isolation but neither is america the police force for the planet. Sorry but even though I work for an american company I resent the american government declaring themselves as leaders of the free world! Hell, even the American TV Olympic coverage was censored! So much for the land of the free.

  100. Floating point? by Maljin+Jolt · · Score: 1

    Floating point is really practical in reading emails. Are you sure the guys at CIA didn't missed something?

    --
    There you are, staring at me again.
  101. Impressive, yes by kjots · · Score: 1

    But can it run Linux?

  102. it was never meant for that by nazsco · · Score: 1

    Those countries don't bother about this because echelon can only understand communication in US/UK protocol. Since North korea don't use the same telephony protocol an neither XML, echelon don't get theirs message. And since it was from the begining a tool for spying on industries, no one cares.

    or do you think that the fact they're using your tax money to pay a texan company and that echelon's biggest know act was to ruin the business of a european company that developed a wind power system by passing private faxes to an american company so they could patent it first and never develop the damn thing and hence keep oil prices high (Oil wich is extratec in texas by the same guy in power) is normal?

  103. Where did this article come from and why. . ? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2, Interesting
    So. . .

    The article was published in "Techworld" which is an affiliate (one of many) of InfoWorld Media Group, which in turn is a limb of IDG. . .

    Headquartered in San Mateo, Calif., InfoWorld Media Group is a wholly owned independent business unit of IDG, the world's leading IT media, research and exposition company. IDG publishes more than 285 computer magazines and newspapers and 500 book titles and offers online users the largest network of technology-specific sites around the world through IDG.net (http://www.idg.net), which comprises more than 200 targeted Web sites in 52 countries. IDG is also a leading producer of 110 computer-related expositions worldwide, and provides IT market analysis through 49 offices in 41 countries worldwide. Company information is available at www.idg.com.

    IDG is one of those earth-flattening corporations which dominates everything. Look at their track record. Interestingly, they're not just interested in owning all the computer publications in the world. They also have their fingers in Brain Research. --Which looks on the surface to be a bit of PR angling, but 350 million worth? Whatever. Creepy.

    Huge publishing conglomerates have mandates and agendas, (whether they realize it or not), so IDG publishing articles about Echelon is interesting to say the least.

    By contrast. . .

    Slashdot is owned by OSDG. (Open Source Data Group)
    From the OSDG website

    In the most recent release of Nielsen//NetRatings' @plan (Summer 2004), OSTG retained its top ranking across all competitive networks for delivering online buyers of computer hardware and software, visitors who purchase home electronics online and visitors who buy anything online. OSTG moved up in the rankings for many consumer technology categories, including visitors who are heavy spenders on computer hardware, visitors who purchase MP3 players, and visitors who purchase video games.

    For the eighth consecutive quarter, OSTG has been validated as the number one network for delivering visitors who look for technology news online. OSTG reaches over 16 million visitors every month and delivers nearly 250 million page views.

    OSDG is in turn owned by VA Software

    [. . .]VA Software develops and markets SourceForge Enterprise Edition, an enterprise-grade solution for managing and optimizing distributed development. SourceForge Enterprise Edition provides a secure, centralized platform that connects heterogeneous tools and processes together with an integrated suite of project, change management and collaboration tools. Fortune 1000 companies and government agencies use SourceForge Enterprise Edition as a Global Development Platform(TM) to integrate disparate tools and processes, expand visibility and control, and improve development efficiency and collaboration.

    VA Software appears to have its morals lined up nicely. That is, their goal appears to be data sharing and the facilitation of collaborative creative efforts. As the much maligned, (and biblically misrepresented), Christ advised, "Judge the Tree by the Fruit it Bears." This is one of the most outstanding bits of advice I have ever heard. Flowing all the way down this particular chain, Slashdot allows peculiar guys like me to speak my mind in forum on taboo subject matter. I have an enormous amount of respect for that.

    Here's an article written by Carl Redfield, a guy way up at the top of th

  104. Re:"Oh Canada" soon to be banned in Canada... by Llama_STi · · Score: 1

    there's no such thing as "Oh Canada". It's "O Canada", thanks.

  105. echelon is completely useless against .... by hipparchus · · Score: 1

    check out http://sourceforge.net/projects/securekey

    Its a one time pad with randomised dictionary entries. I really really can't see how this can be broken, no matter how many ASICs you use.

    1. Re:echelon is completely useless against .... by zejackal · · Score: 1

      One time pads, when implemented properly, are always immune to cryptographic attack. As long as the one time pad is truely random, it remains secure, and both the sender and receiver are synchronized there is no way to discern any information masked by the one time pad. The problem is that satisfying all three of these requirements in a useable system is almost impossible.

  106. Uhmmm ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Learn how to spell CANADA.

    Yeesh.

  107. Usenet not likely to be used? Then what's this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seen a lot of these on comp.lang.java among others.


    1. Re:Usenet not likely to be used? Then what's this? by Kronovohr · · Score: 1

      You might be right, but it also could be an attempt to clog bayesian filters for USENET spam (they do have those these days, right?) or just crapflood. However, I stand corrected. Thanks :)

  108. Re:Didn't this happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought there was a canadian citizen that we intercepted at our borders and then sent to Syria where he said he was tortured.

    Whatever, people this this place is so great, but it's all smoke and mirrors.

  109. OBSimpsons quote by schon · · Score: 1

    Lisa: "By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away."
    Homer: "Oh, how does it work?"
    Lisa: "It doesn't work! It's just a stupid rock!"
    Homer: "Uh-huh."
    Lisa: "But I don't see any tigers around, do you?"
    Homer: "I would like to buy your rock!"

  110. Could open source do something about this? by carlmenezes · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If we have stuff like :

    => Encrypted communications using GPG.
    => Encrypted VoIP using GPG

    wouldn't that make it a LOT more difficult for echelon to crack? They'll have to first crack the encryption.

    We need some kind of open-source organization that concentrates on safe-guarding privacy and that helps in the development of such tools and their widesperead adoption.

    See, the thing with OSS is that it can be used to overcome tyrannical elements - MS is one...maybe invasion of privacy is another? What do you think?

    I mean, if this could be done on a large scale with network communication secured by default, with VOIP secured by default, with email encrypted by default, wouldn't that significantly reduce the effectiveness of Echelon? Wouldn't it also result in more fairplay all around?

    --
    Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
    1. Re:Could open source do something about this? by gone.fishing · · Score: 1

      I don't really know. The limits that they can go to to decrypt messages is probably pretty extreme, at least that has been what was talked about online. If people started encrypting more stuff they probably would step up efforts in that direction.

  111. Echelon an advertisment for F/OSS mail +encryption by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1
    Well since many people like to confuse Linux with Open Source and Free Software, there is a tie in here.

    Echelon, even the very concept of it, is a living example of why government agencies need to be sceptical about accepting black box technologies which may or may not work as advertised. Going back to 2000/2001, the resolution ,"European Parliament resolution on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications" (ECHELON interception system) (2001/2098(INI)) brings up F/OSS explicitly:

    29.Urges the Commission and Member States to devise appropriate measures to promote, develop and manufacture European encryption technology and software and above all to support projects aimed at developing user-friendly open-source encryption software
    30.Calls on the Commission and Member States to promote software projects whose source text is made public (open-source software), as this is the only way of guaranteeing that no backdoors are built into programmes;
    31.Calls on the Commission to lay down a standard for the level of security of e-mail software packages, placing those packages whose source code has not been made public in the "least reliable" category;
    32.Calls on the European institutions and the public administrations of the Member States systematically to encrypt e-mails, so that ultimately encryption becomes the norm; F/OSS is mentioned elsewhere in the respolution well.
    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  112. New Zealand? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are five countries in the Echelon Network, not four. Lazy journalist.

  113. Please fix misspelled country names in main posts! by francisew · · Score: 1

    It is either a typo or an insult. Whichever the case, after 24 hours of being posted, it becomes obvious that it is no longer an overlooked typo.

    Please fix such blatent misspellings. Canada is not spelled 'Cananda'. I'm sure that a significant number of readers, moderators and editors know this. Which leads me to wonder why it wasn't fixed.

  114. Re:Echelon an advertisment for F/OSS mail +encrypt by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much of Echelon was outsourced to companies tapping its info riches for profit and patriotism for enemies of the American people, apart from the usual US government suspects.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  115. Re:Didn't this happen by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

    I thought there was a canadian citizen that we intercepted at our borders and then sent to Syria where he said he was tortured.

    There was. Maher Arar was picked up by the US, detained, questioned, and then deported to Syria where Arar claims US officials new he would be tortured. So far, CSIS has been cleared of any wrongdoing, however the RCMP is looking pretty bad. Arar is now back in Canada and is filing suit against the US government.

  116. thanks for stating the obvious by SethJohnson · · Score: 1



    Dude. How do you think Al Qaeda is communicating with all its sleeper cells here in the US? Ever wonder why SPAM has escalated significantly since the United States attacked Afghanistan? Most of the new spam are coded messages.

    Just throwing some paranoid schizo stuff into your discussion. It was otherwise a very complete posting. Let's continue to post "this story is a dupe" messages on slashdot to let our Al Qaeda leaders know we're still receiving their orders loud and clear.

  117. Echelon may use Linux by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1

    I didn't see anything that said Echelon didn't use Linux... In fact they suggeted that the thing might be controled by a central CRAY system -- and Cray supports Linux on their hardware.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  118. AHH! by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

    The problem, however, is filtering that kind of traffic in any timely matter

    Did you READ TFA? They have multiterabyte 'buffers' to keep the thing fed.

    I'm sure after some very simple initial analysis they can safely toss 99.99% of the initial data. They might run a few hours behind during peak hours, but they can catch up later by storing compressed voice in the aforementioned buffers.

    can't tell what the data is in any reliable manner without a massive, memory based system

    Again, this is what the article is about. There's PLENTY of storage. And for the record, decoding VoIP would be infinitely easier than tapping raw voice, it's already compressed and the vendors are standardized on a few protocols that are not (usually) encrypted.

    but it's highly unlikely they've got a bunch of genuses sitting locked up in a bunker somewhere breaking encryption algorithms for them 24/7

    Dude! I _KNOW_ people who have done this sort of thing, and people who build ASICs that automate it. Most of the time a fair amount of detective work yeilds better results than attempts at decryption, but Uncle Sam definitely has a bunch of high-end math-heads working on finding vulnerabilities in today's encryption.

    I don't particularily see them being able effectivly spy on a whole lot of jack shit

    I do. Considering how FEW people use encryption in a non-corporate sense, it would be trivial to at least keep tabs on the folks who have the wherewithall to build secured systems. I have no doubt that if I set-up a secure-comm system for some shady arabs, the feds would be knocking at my door, or worse.

    --
    "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  119. Why bother? by Yenin · · Score: 1

    It would be easier for the government just to install spyware on everyone's computer.

  120. YOU should use F/OSS + encryption by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1
    It doesn't matter what Echelon runs. If you read the EU resolution on Echelon, or think about it, there were two points:

    First, if you use a F/OSS you can be reasonably sure there are no back doors in your mail server or client if you choose to investigate. Second, if you take a similar approach to encryption algorithms and software and use ecncyption in all e-mail communication then you are much less likely to be of use to Echelon.

    Yes, your network / infrastructure could probably still be cracked manually, but thats a hell of a lot different from letting everyone between here and your customer (can be 30 hops at times) read your messages.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    1. Re:YOU should use F/OSS + encryption by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1

      I fully agree with you on all points -- in fact, I think that I may have replied to the wrong posting... I was replying to the comment about someone thinking we (the OS community) were somehow pissed that Echelon was supposedly not based on Open source. My point is that there's no evidence that that was the case -- and, in fact what evidence there is suggest that it probably was (and that may be a bit to the chagrin of some OS developers -- but, hey that's life and a side effect of Open source: It doesn't only get used by the people you like today).

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  121. Re:"Oh Canada" soon to be banned in Canada... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Canada criminalized "hate speech" including the Holy Bible.

    Go Canada! If you want to see some real hate speech, try reading the Old Testament.

  122. Neighbor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, you're a New Zealander. And your photo is hosted in Germany.

    Interesting... does that tell me something?