Slashdot Mirror
NSA (partially) Declassified
Lally Singh writes "Posted yesterday on the National Security Archives was the NSA's "Transition 2001" report, prepared as an introductory report for President Bush (II)'s incoming administration. "The largest U.S. spy agency warned the incoming Bush administration in its 'Transition 2001' report that the Information Age required rethinking the policies and authorities that kept the National Security Agency in compliance with the Constitution's 4th Amendment prohibition on 'unreasonable searches and seizures' without warrant and 'probable cause,' according to an updated briefing book of declassified NSA documents posted today on the World Wide Web.""
Dick Gordon: National Security Agency.
Martin Bishop: Ah. You're the guys I hear breathing on the other end of my phone.
Dick Gordon: No, that's the FBI. We're not chartered for domestic surveillance.
Martin Bishop: Oh, I see. You just overthrow governments. Set up friendly dictators.
Dick Gordon: No, that's the CIA. We protect our government's communications, we try to break the other fella's codes. We're the good guys, Marty.
Martin Bishop: Gee, I can't tell you what a relief that is, Dick.
I can only assume the information declassified might intersect that which is already known...
You should view this lecture: of how they passed a bill on the day of Saddam's capture that allows them to search without a warrant... http://www.cato.org/realaudio/cbf-12-14-04.ram
Before anyone points out that now we'll find out the truth about the infamous NSAKEY in Windows or some dirty little secrets of Bush administration, I would like to remind you that according to Bruce Schneier "algorithms from the NSA are considered a sort of alien technology: They come from a superior race with no explanations." The most important implication of declassifying NSA would be a better understanding of the mysterious rationale of many of NSA decisions in crypto algorithms, because even many aspects of DES remain a mystery to this day. So please stop the explosion of crackpot conspiracy theories and focus on the most important issue: cryptoanallysis.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
he Information Age required rethinking the policies and authorities that kept the National Security Agency in compliance with the Constitution's 4th Amendment prohibition on 'unreasonable searches and seizures' without warrant and 'probable cause
Yet more "we should be above the law to protect you" crap. I don't usually wear a tinfoil hat, but 1984 seems to be approaching faster than I would like.
The 4th clearly wasn't tough enough. It is simply all to esay to make up phony causes "like the war on drugs", like "catching terrorists" as an excuse to do anything they want. The 4th should have been much more demanding, and demanded harsh punishment for those who do anything that has the effect of weakening it.
from page 32 (38 in PDF viewer of nsa25.pdf)
Make no mistake, NSA can and will perform its missions consistent with the fourth amendment and all applicable laws.
There is some concern at least. This would mean nothing if it were a public statement, but it's a bit reassuring that they think this even in documents not meant for public consumption
E = m c^3 Don't drink and derive E = m c^3
And if you want to help the NSAs comint mission to intercept keywords from the Internet, download and use random subsets of the following list frequently in your international communications:
_ chaff_valium_noforn_snie_winintel_orcon_oc/semioti c_war_lexical_chaff_valium_noforn_snie_winintel_or con_oc.html
http://www.spywarearcata.com/semiotic_war_lexical
This should greatly help the NSA to protect us from bad ideas. Please suggest improvements and additions to this list. 1836.15@gmail.com
Is it just me, or is document 26b missing? It's probably just a goof-up, really, but still, it's rather funny - you don't really see that kind of goof-up every day, after all, or at least not on the websites of a well-known university (which I think the GWU counts as).
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
Guantanamo Bay Detention of prisoners:
See also:
Camp X-Ray
and:
Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse
No, it's not about SS and Gestapo in Nazi Germany, it's about our US Army. I wish it never happened but it did and we as real patriots have the responsibility to talk about it.
"The need for action was underscored in January 2000 when NSA experienced a catastrophic network outage of 3 1/2 days. This outage greatly reduced the signals intelligence information available to national decision makers and military commanders. As one result, the President's Daily Briefin - 60% of which is normally based on SIGINT - was reduced to a small portion of its typical size."
Oh, an a few paragraph above, they presented their favoured solution : outsourcing (to the industry).
#include "coucou.h"
I have only had a few discussions with those in the government security community as a civilian moderator on a government security forum. What I have learned is the following:
1) The NSA is the most likely to be concerned about "unreasonable searches and seizures" and other Bill of Rights issues. The FBI and CIA routinely take the "extreme circumstance" route and use common loopholes to justify citizen and non-citizen monitoring. I would argue, however, that I have yet to see an ill-intented abuse of their power.
2) Members from all branches of the Department of Defense are active Slashdot readers and contributers. They just never talk about what they do and some use "Tor" to post from work.
3) The NSA has an extremely bright team of civilians that do the bulk of their cryptoanalysis work. One of which is famous, and not for the work he does in cryptology. You'd actually laugh aloud if you knew. I guess it is his hobby, but someone is taking him seriously.
4) The FBI is nothing like you see in the movies. The brightest agents last about 2 years before moving to a different area. Internally, the FBI has some serious issues with "dinosaurs" and "micro-management".
5) There is one member of the CIA that is single-handedly responsible for saving us from the plan devised by Jose Padilla. Unfortunately, they will never get the credit they deserve. It only took one person to say, "Why is this American talking with Abu Zubaydah twice?".
6) If you join the NSA, you voluntarily give up your rights to unreasonable searches and seizures. In fact, you have to agree to have your phone tapped and everything you do is monitored 24/7. It's a life-long career choice, but they take care of you "very well".
Is it not possible that since they knew the document would be declassified at some point they wrote it as if it was meant to be for public consumption?
I'm assuming that, if they're declassifying parts of the NSA, there is another, more classified organisation taking over from it. I think they did something like that with Area 51 -- shifting everything important to new locations -- when it became so well-known to the public.
Freedom is never "won". It's not a battle that you fight, win, and from then on people can enjoy the victory.
It's always, ALWAYS hanging by a thread.
Every generation will have to keep fighting for it, over and over, until the end of time.
Those who look at things like Nazism as freak accidents are only fooling themselves. Oppressive governments are the rule, not the exception in history. People are easily convinced, either quickly in harsh circumstances, or in slow, careful and quiet measures in good times, to at first not care about others, and then not care about themselves.
Even if you're lucky enough to live in a country whose founding is based on some good ideals, you've still got to realize, that country will spend the rest of its history struggling to get anywhere near living up to those ideals.
This comment has nothing to do with the NSA or this story whatsover.
Go post this in your journal, but this comment does not deserve to be modded up just because you agree with it.
Martin: "You know, I could have joined the NSA, but they found out my parents were married"
:-)
Dick: "Heh...." (holds back Wallace) "Hey, we're all FRIENDS here..."
Oh, and:
Carl: "The young lady with the Uzi. Is she single?"
Martin: "Carl. This is the brass ring."
Carl: "I just want her phone number"
Martin: "How about a lunch date? You can chaparone. The FBI will give 'em twins."
Abbott: "NO!"
Mary: "You could have anything in the world and you want my phone number?"
Carl: "....yes."
Mary: "342-4525. Area code 701" (sorry, I don't remember her number
Carl: "I'm Carl."
Mary(giggles): "I'm Mary."
Abbott: "I'm going to be sick."
Please help metamoderate.
I find it interesting that with all of the flag waving, and beating of drums to "protect America", we never hear urgent discussion of the greatest threat this country has ever faced.
If blowing up a building is terrorism, surely attempting to evicerate the Constitution and sacrificing every thing that makes the U.S. worth protecting is high treason!
If the terrorists goal is to destroy the American way of life, what does that say about those federal agencies and Congresscritters that are so anxious to dismantle the principles of the American way of life?
If terrorism is the deliberate creation of fear in the civillain population to further a political goal, what does that say about DHS's perminant orange alert telling us to be afraid.
What does the fact that I wonder if I should post this anonymously say?
If this report was first posted January 2000, then most of it was probably thrown out and re-written twenty months later. No wonder they declassified it.
Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
I have read the quoted Briefing Book on the website non-profit organization The National Security Archive, and also the underlying NSA document Transition 2001.
A careless reading of that Briefing Book's comments on Transition 2001 might leave you with the impression that the NSA is calling for being freed from compliance with the 4th Amendment. However, that is NOT what the Briefing Book says, nor does the underlying NSA document do so. Slashdotters, please read the documents before making wild-eyed postings.
Here are the relevant paragraphs from Transition 2001:
SIGINT in the Industrial Age meant collecting signals, often high frequency (HF) signals connecting two discrete and known target points, processing the often clear text data and writing a report. eSIGINT in the Information Age means seeking information on the Global Net, using all available access techniques, breaking often strong encryption, again using all available means, defending our nation's own use of the Global net, and assisting our warfighters in preparing the battlefield for the cyberwars of the future. The Fourth Amendment is as applicable to eSIGINT as it is to the SIGINT of yesterday and today. The Information Age will however cause us to rethink and reapply the procedures, policies and authorities born in an earlier electronic surveillance environment.
Make no mistake, NSA can and will perform its missions consistent with the Fourth Amendment and all applicable laws. But senior leadership must understand that today's and tomorrow's mission will demand a powerful, permanent presence on a global telecommunications network that will host the "protected" communications of Americans as well as the targeted communications of adversaries.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
The accellerating attacs on civil liberties and human rights, in particular under Bush II, are very worrysome. The new General Attorney is the very same man that wrote in a memorandum that the Geneva Convention is obsolete when it come to "the war on terror". That torture could be done. Who are now the bad guys? It's sure is getting confusing :
...let's keep in mind that the NSA exists for a reason, and that reason is important.
/. tends to drift into Pollyanna-land where the only thing we have to fear is those 'debbils' in government that want to take our freedoms away. No. Let's keep our priorities straight and remember that while overzealous policemen certainly need to be disciplined and corrected, they are STILL the "good guys" as long as you are realistic and remember the really BAD alternatives out there.
In the same sense that tinfoil-hatters are constantly alert to the possibilty that "they are watching us", the NSA exists because there are countries and organizations and individuals whose interests ARE inimical to the United States. It shouldn't have to be said this shortly after the Cold War, or even Sept 11, but the security agencies of the United States have a serious and IMPORTANT function.
Do they go overboard? Once in a while, no question they exceed their mandate, usually from an overzealous interpretation of their duties. Yes, it's important to find a careful compromise between secrecy and oversight REQUIRED by a free society.
However, I think occasionally
-Styopa
I'd argue that you haven't been looking very hard then.
The Church Commission clearly showed that the FBI and CIA were in cahoots spying on legitimate political activity in the US during the 60s (ya know, all those pesky civil rights people, socialists). One of the positive outcomes of the Church Commission was that a firewall was erected between the CIA and FBI. Right now all the 9-11 ambulance chasing anti-patriots are busy trying to rip down that wall and have largely succeeded in doing so.
Or you could take a look at Echelon where the nogoodniks of the State Terrorist Superpower known as the USA were conducting industrial espionage against our "allies" in Europe.
Add to this that all this "declassification" crap relates to activities years ago instead of the shenanigans going on now which is necessary to inform our voting behavior and I'd say you're pretty complacent.
The NSA warned Bush that action must be taken to protect the 4t amendment.
..
Bush then passed the Patriot Act, with effectively suspends the 4th amendment (and 6th).
And the American people said
"thank you thank you! please take more of my inaliable rights away from me so I can feel safe from the enemies my government makes for itself!"
The average american decided it was ok to allow their fellow citizens to be arrested and held without charge, without being allowed to see a lawyer or even notify family. As long as the thousands of citizens that were now being abused was not them personally, then who cares.
When really, they should have carried out their own Constitutional Responsibility to fight for those rights to the point of overthrowing Bush.
But the average american stopped thinking they need to act on their responsibilities a few decades ago when suing everyone for any stupid reason became the norm.
America has died at the hands of its own people. Welcome back to 1930's Germany.
George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
An ex-NASA/Airforce acquaintance recently recounted how his group used some specalized technical services of "some people who don't exist". When I replied "oh, you mean NSA/CIA?" he responded "No they still don't exist, and I really shouldn't say any more". The Men In Black do exist!! :)
The House of Representatives did. The US Senate did by a margin 98-2 or similar. Even John Kerry voted for it and never went back to vote against it.
Kinda like the Kyoto Accords - they went down in the US Senate 95-0.
Hell, the US declaration of war against Japan after Pearl Harbor had more opposition.
I work there. You've got it backwards.
The rules for access to data are extremely strict and the NSA takes the 4th Amendment very seriously.
The governing directive is USSID 18 (here is an older declassifed version). Anyone requiring access to certain types of data is thoroughly briefed on this (even if you're a developer and just need data to work with).
If you're an analyst requiring an account on one of the search tools you get the above mentioned briefing and a more tailored briefing. In addition, before an account is granted two auditors at a supervisory level must be identified. Those auditors get a weekly report of every search you conduct.
People have lost their clearances over misusing the databases (which also means the loss of the job). No one at the NSA is cavalier with the data and access is tightly controlled. The NSA definitely works hard to remain within the law, and any violations are incidental, not some sort of secret big brother program.
Besides, anything found through the illegal use of data couldn't be used in court, and the loss of the public trust would hurt the NSA far more than catching you downloading "The Family Guy". The real bad guys (legitimate and lawful targets) though, we work very hard to take down.
Anybody who understands the historical context of the Geneva Convention would agree that it is obsolete. Read the bloody document, then come back and participate in the discussion.
I read it. It's not obsolete. It's only called "obsolete" by certain people who want to justify their "need" for systematical torture.
The Geneva Convention was designed for exactly the kind of crisis that we face, namely large-scale conflicts where a lot of people are threatened by certain forces. While it wasn't specifically written for the case of terrorism, its teleological ideas of human rights hold up, and it's the duty of democrat (as in "believes in the democratic system", not as in the political party) to rise up against a government pulling human rights through the dirt, for a very unspecific "war on terror" with badly defined targets.
Make no mistake, times will come where the US government will be punished for their self-righteousness they currently show to the world.
A monkey is doing the real work for me.
Its a real stretch to say that what they've been doing is even legal. Its no accident the U.S. is puting most of its prisoners in Gitmo or unnamed spots around the world and outside the U.S. They are using Gitmo because its mostly outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. legal system and its obviously not under the jurisdiction of the host country, Cuba. They are using Gitmo precisely so they can skirt the law and international treaties to which the U.S. is a signatory.
They are also using the CIA's semi secret rendition program for the same reason. They ship prisoners to countries who are eager to torture prisoners during interrogation, they take the usally bad intelligence that results(and most intelligence from torture is bad because people will say anything to make the pain stop) so they are completely complicit in the torture. This allows the American's to deny they are torturing anyone though in fact they are the ones snatching, often innocent, people off the street with no proof they are guilty of anything, cutting their clothes of with razors, shoving a tranquilizer up their ass and flying them to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria or Jordan to be tortured. These aren't "terrorists" for the most part, they are suspects. This is the whole problem with the civil rights abuses in the "War on Terror". There is usually little or no evidence most of these people being held indefinitely, tortured and sometimes killed have actually done anything. The extermely fallible agencies and agents involved are acting as judge, jury and executioner. When you do this you are flouting the rule of law, something the U.S. constantly preaches to other countries about. Well the U.S. circumvents the rule of law any and everytime they find it necessary so it is rank hypocrisy for the U.S. to lecture anyone else about it. Rendition is also clearly violating the sovereignty of countries where snatches have taken place without the consent and cooperation of the host country.
Fact is the U.S Senate approved the UN treaty on torture in 1994 and the Geneva conventions go back further than that and the U.S. is clearly violating these treaties. Countries sign the UN and Geneva conventions on torture as a measure of protection for their citizens to discourage them from being tortured if the are imprisoned. Now that America has established a clear track record of endorsing torture, its citizens will no moral high ground to protect them if they are imprisoned.
You might be able to argue stateless combantants like Al Qaeda don't fall under the Geneva conventions but I assure you every Iraqi tortured in Abu Graib did as did every Afghani in Afghanistan. When Gonzalez opened the pandora's box on torture for Al Qaeda he opened it up in Iraq and Afghanistan where it is clearly a violation of international treaties, to which the U.S. is a signatory, to torture citizens of an occupied country. When such violations occur they are normally considered war crimes, if it were any country doing it other than the precious U.S. with its double standards that is. The Geneva conventions, to which the U.S. is a signatory clearly defines how you treat citizens of an occupied country which both Iraq and Afghanistan are, and this covers all citizens of the country not uniformed combatants. There is a seperate article for uniformed combatants that clearly doesn't apply here which is something Gonzalez and company glossed over. The citizens of an occupied country rules clearly do apply to Afghans in Afghanistan and Iraqis in Iraq. The convention for treatement of people in occupied countries specificly bans torture and humiliation of prisoners.
@de_machina