Slashdot Mirror
NSA Chose Invasive Phone Analysis Option
Encrypted Anonymous Coward writes "The Baltimore Sun reveals the existence of an interesting experimental NSA program codenamed ThinThread from the late 90`s. The program involved link analysis of traffic data, with a twist; The phone numbers from the U.S. would only be analyzed in an encrypted form. This way the analysis would potentially be possible under existing privacy laws, according to the people behind the program. The NSA could gather further unencrypted details if there was evidence of a threat. Political infighting seems to have dropped an interesting and respectful program from the books."
Part of the proposed program would make it illegal to do so without a court order. And therefore, any evidence gained from a surreptitiously decrypted number would be inadmissible in court (and very embarrassing for the NSA).
See, technically the only thing that stops the police from tapping every phone (other than respect for the community) is that it's illegal to do so and any evidence gathered is wholly worthless.
-=-=-=-=-=
I'd rather be flamed than ignored.
Obviously turning the "encrypted number" back into a real one would never slip from "a threat was found" to "we wanted to know who it was".
You're crapping on an effective means of controlling who gets access to data because there's a possibility it might not be used properly in some instances. If it's not used properly, then we have the situation we already are in. At the very least, we can file this under "better and under no circumstances worse."
Whether or not we can label it "good" is beyond the scope of me.
Having done some evaluation of products like Centrifuge for data analysis, showing patterns of calls alone is likely not enough. You really want to tie additional associations (person_to_organization, person_to_person, person_to_building, person_to_events, etc...) in order to derive intelligence. If they are looking for patterns without additional information, I'm not sure what NSA hopes to accomplish. I'm sure if they tracked calls from my cell phone, they'd find odd patterns when my kids get a hold of it (repeated calls to my wife's phone in order to annoy her).
We are at a crossroads, and we need to take a step back from the emotion of September eleventh (nearly 5 years later) and really look at what we want to see in the future.
I won't stand on a soapbox here and force my opinion on others but I think it is time for a very serious debate over what is acceptable to give up in the name of security, what secrets we will let our government keep from us and what checks and balances need to be in place.
I think we are in trouble of letting "terrorism" be the ultimate excuse for any unpopular move by the government and it sadens me to see that the events of 2001 have changed us so much.
P.S.
The latest Justifications I have heard for the NSA wire taping are indicative of the problem... saying "we havent had a terrorist atack because of this program" is like saying "the wolly mammoth repelant is working" unless you can show proof that attacks have been thwarted .
I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
Mark Twain
-=-=-=-=-=
I'd rather be flamed than ignored.
I think the point is to keep the NSA from knowing whose phone records it's looking at, not to protect them in case they fall into the "wrong hands".
Depending on the circumstances, how do you make the distinction between the NSA and the "wrong hands"? =)
But seriously, ThinThread as originally constituted contains the mechanism necessary for oversight. It's amazing that they dispensed with that part of the program, especially now in hindsight when the Administration is embroiled in a scandal. What were they thinking? Are they that arrogant? That stupid?
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
In this person's world, by definition, the public should never be able to point to an intelligence accomplishment. Our best response to the existence of stuff like these NSA capers is to keep our heads down. So said my brother-in-law, who had previously explained to me his rationale by which Nixon was the best President we've ever had.
One can see the obvious stepping off point to "the real traitors are the ones who *reveal* our secret, extra-constitutional prison system."
Confronted with evidence of past incompetence on the part of the CIA -- I mentioned the massive expense of the Glomar Explorer misadventure, which got us basically nothing new (old details about an aging vintage Soviet sub) for the staggering money involved -- John simply suggested that there must've been a lot more to the story, and that it obviously succeeded because we didn't know about the successful parts. (Whereupon he spun straw into gold and disappeared like Colonel Flag on M*A*S*H -- "like the wind" -- from our family. I believe he's living as an expat in China now.)
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
Member -- (Date of Admission)
United States of America -- (24 Oct. 1945)
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
As long as you wear a paper bag over your head, the Feds should be able to explore your body cavities!
Be heard || Be herd