NSA To Datamine Social Networking Sites

An anonymous reader writes "New Scientist has discovered that the NSA is funding research into the mass harvesting of the information that people post about themselves on social networks. And it could harness advances in Internet technology -- specifically the forthcoming 'semantic web' championed by the Web standards organisation W3C -- to combine data from social networking websites with details such as banking, retail and property records, allowing the NSA to build extensive, all-embracing personal profiles of individuals."

Comments

Standard Waste of Our Tax $

[eldavojohn]

NSA Researcher: "Herr Direktor, the results from mining Slashdot have just come in!"
NSA Director Alexander: "Well, what have you found, son?"
NSA Researcher: "Well, sir, according to the report, this multi-billion dollar project has revealed that TripMaster Monkey is insightful, informative & interesting ... also that ..."
NSA Director Alexander: "Yes, what else?"
NSA Researcher: "It's about Commander Taco, sir ... he's gay.
NSA Director Alexander: "My GOD! Get me the president! And make sure he's dishonerably discharged immediately!"
NSA Researcher: "Yes SIR!"

How are they certain that the rules derived from these sites like MySpace or even Slashdot are even accurate? People post mis-information all the time & you can hardly call MySpace a reliable source for even seeding a semantic web. You can build a social network but even then it's hard because you're linking mostly aliases. Nowhere will you find my real name associated with my slashdot or myspace account--though you may be able to link them.

Re:Standard Waste of Our Tax $

[Moqui]

On MySpace, I am independently wealthy, married to *two* supermodels, and have so much Slashdot karma that I have infinite mod points.

Because, as we all know, no one lies on the Internet. :)

In all seriousness though, there is a difference between the NSA parsing MySpace pages and the NSA pulling down phone records. It's my fault if I put anything on the social sites that could be used against me in the future (see: retarded bank robbers who post pictures of their "loot" with masks off on their MySpace pages) as the site is public by its very definition (well, the publicly non-friend sections that is). My phone records on the other hand, are private.

Data mine all you want, I don't think it will give you that much information. That is, other than how not to style a webpage.

Re:Standard Waste of Our Tax $

[TCM]

It's my fault if I put anything on the social sites that could be used against me in the future (see: retarded bank robbers who post pictures of their "loot" with masks off on their MySpace pages) as the site is public by its very definition (well, the publicly non-friend sections that is).

I'd be wary about this. By the same logic, would you agree to full-scale public surveillance in picture and sound combined with massive computing power to dig out any detail and hold it against you, because it's public anyway?

Example: I don't participate in Payback schemes, because there is a difference between

1) the local gas station clerk knows what I bought in his station only and can maybe remember my face for some days.

2) the gas company knows what I bought nation-wide and can dig through it with unlimited accuracy.

If you have to be careful all the time about what you say publicly, guess what you have? Ask people from before-1989 easter germany or a chinese citizen. They can tell you.

Re:Standard Waste of Our Tax $

[kimvette]

No, that was the previous administration.

The current administration wants to "protect the children" by not only disallowing teenage tramps to not post pictures online, but legal consenting adults to not be able to post alluring pictures online either. We've gone from one extreme to the other. When can we get a reasonable, level-headed moderate? The more I think about the current administration, the more reasonable I think that libertarians are, because they're all about personal responsibility. Compared to today's "liberals" and "conservatives" our founding fathers would likely be considered to be libertarians. I'm registered as a Republican because I believe in true conservatism (small government, limited powers and no interference in private lives, etc) but in the last few years that seems to not be the Republican platform any more. It seems that both parties are out for totalitarianism, albeit through different methods but the end result is the same: powermongering and greed, with no thought or care about their "constituents." Tell them what they want to hear, then do what you want.

The saddest thing? Fewer than 50% of citizens bother to register to vote, and only about half of those bother to vote at elections. This is all our own fault. We have what may be in theory the best possible government (aside from communism, which is the theoretical ideal if it weren't for the greed aspect of human nature on the part of those in power). The reason our system hasn't been working is citizens squander their right to vote, and when they do vote, they don't vote wisely thinking about long-term ramifications of whom they place into power. It's not too late to fix the problem: the key is to vote! (I know, I just made the Captain Obvious "duh" statement of the year there)

Re:Standard Waste of Our Tax $

[daviddennis]

One problem is that we have to make huge compromises in who we vote for, since there are in the end only two alternatives.

The amount of influence the man on the street has over policy is basically microscopic.

On the other hand, before you write off our system as a failure, compare life in America over life in other countries. Surely most of us would rather live under our system of government than that of, say, Saudi Arabia or China. Even Europe has huge disadvantages over the American system, with its declining population, dying welfare states and high unemployment rates.

Some famous person, whose name I don't remember, said that Democracy is, of course, the worst system of government ... except, of course for all the others!

Our system works and in fact has created unprecented prosperity. The poor here have it made compared to the poor in, say, the Philippines where you have to work 10 hour days, six days a week, to make about $ 5 a day, which pays for substandard housing and a couple of meals and that's it. No TV for these folks; in many cases, no electricticy either. And forget Internet, connections are $ 0.50 an hour, which doesn't seem like much until you remember the $5 a day part.

Now, culturally we've grown pretty harsh and pretty messy. I don't have any good answers on the steady decline of civility and decency. And by decency I don't mean lack of pornography; I mean basic friendliness towards my fellow man. I wouldn't mind it if women went topless or nude all the time but I'd rather have the sales clerks in stores not act like selling me stuff was an imposition on their valuable time.

I remember in the Philippines I would go into a convenience store and see the girl manning the cash register say "Welcome sir" and when they didn't have the Diet Coke I wanted, they would say "I'm sorry, sir" in a tone that made me feel they really meant it.

Our system, then, is greatly flawed, but so is the Philippines system with its dreadful poverty. It may be better to get a wife in the Philippines, but it's better to earn a living here in the US. And since we spend most of our lives trying to do that, that's probably the more important thing for most of us.

D

Re:Welcome to..

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

.. 1984. George was right, just off by 22 years.

The NSA's been intercepting & analysing any communications it can get its hands on since its inception.

Nothing new here, and its been going on since long before 1984 (although george was smart seeing it coming in '48).

Re:Just not feeling it today...

[Billosaur]

If you put a sign in your front yard declaring how much you hate the government, you shouldn't act too surprised when the government reads it.

True... but if you put personal data up on the Internet for everyone to see, hoping to attract like-minded individuals and get your personal ideas and beliefs out into the main stream, you really don't expect the Federal Government to take that information, process, and try to link you to nefarious doings, do you? Mind you, I think it's a poor idea to put too much correct personal information out there, because it's not just government snoops you have to worry about. Still, given the fact that it's easy to string together unrelated information to make a plausible case (prosecutors do this a lot), you have to wonder just how the Feds might misinterpret your information and calim your involvement in something you have nothing to do with. Remember, we interned Japanese-Americans during WWII, not because they were spies, but just because of their Japanese ancestry.

How do you sleep at night, NSA workers?

[kthejoker]

I still don't get how NSA workers as American citizens can justify this kind of BS in their heads. They seriously must be the most sociopathic, mean-spirited, fascist-minded people in the country.

Seriously, as a citizen of this great country, I couldn't sleep at night if I were personally responsible in some way for collecting and aggregating this information.

We should expect that actually.

[PotatoHead]

With this particular administration, it's troublesome because I just KNOW they are going to use it to serve their interests, not ours in general.

I got worked up about this a while ago and the hard truth is that free speech is just that --free! We all are big kids and have spoken on the Internet. If what we have written is defensible, then we can expect to live by it. Those of us older school netizens are very likely to understand this and post accordingly. I honestly worry about the current generation however. It's difficult to differentiate casual speech where feelings are expressed in less than flattering ways from more serious speech with some measure of intent behind it.

Which again brings me back to some worry where this administration is concerned. The fact that they are looking to do this because they can suggests to me the motivation is less than pure. Honestly, why bother unless there is some benefit to all of us for doing it. Afterall we are the ones paying the bill.

We, as a people, are reaching a general state of unrest --and we've got reasons for that. The Internet empowers us to trancend the ordinary media channels and exercize our role in ways that make established power channels nervous. Real change brings with it some accountability for those gaming the system toward their own ends. Given their position, this is a perfectly logical reaction.

A government doing the right things, that has the high ground where justifying it's actions is concerned, has little reason for efforts like this. Take this as strong evidence this is not the case with our current leadership.

So, even though we have all spoken on the net and technically should not worry because it's all legal, I say there is some cause for worry for the accountability factor. (Not us, our leadership.)

Here's the takeaway: If you want to speak, in this connected day and age, on matters of government, you had better make sure what you write is defensible and that you have the high ground in your convictions. If not, you will be marginalized at some time in the future if your activities merit the effort. That sucks, but that's gonna be the way it is until such time as we elect a solid government that will modify existing legislation to keep such activities in check. Trust me, this particular one is just not ever going to do that.

The good news, IMHO, is that this same connected power that puts us in an exposed position also permits us to work together toward solid reform that is in our best interests! Best to take serious advantage of that now, before the advantage is lost, or legislated away. Is there no longer any doubt about the true intent of net neutrality? Sure, money is the big driver here, but so is speech! The blogs, for better or worse, have made complete fools of the established media channels and a growing number of people grok that now. (Why the hell did it take so long?)

We see our attorney general saying he is open to the idea of prosecution for whistle blowers, our President and Vice have claimed to be above the law and cloak pretty much everything in secrecy, our global actions are more self-serving than ever, recent court appointees are screened for their deference to established power channels, and our expectation of privacy is being marginalized under the ruse of greater security. (God damm it, a whole lotta people have no fucking backbone!) --And there is more, but hey --I've gotta work you know?

Show me some benefit and I'll ignore this whole thing. Until then, it's probably safe to say this will be used to marginalize any potential challengers to the current status quo politically.

Despite this, I personally will continue to speak. Our speech lies at the core of our freedom. Stay quiet and all is lost. Join me, put aside your fear they cultivate and speak your mind --just be sure it's true and just. --eventually we all will be better for it, IMHO.

I want to see a contest.

[unsigned integer]

About who can fake the NSA out. Using webrings, postings, blog articles, code words, etc.

I want it all to point to some abandoned house that's supposedly a terrorist cell.

I want a webcam and computer to snap a picture of NSA agents busting in, and then print
them out a little message :

"Stop domestic spying. Stop hurting America with your un-American actions. Stand up. Do
something. Speak out."

Re:Won't someone think of the children????

[slashbob22]

Well said sir.
I think there are two aspects to this. The first is the mining if information which is subvertly obtained. An example of this is the ATT monitoring case - this is not appropriate and assumes everyone guilty. As to your point, most people I talk to don't mind this because "they have nothing to hide". Get real, sure you may have nothing to hide, yet. What guarantees do you have that the powers that be won't dictate "X" as an unsuitable activity. We should absolutely not teach our children that living in a police state is acceptable.

The second aspect that ties more into this specific story is how much information you provide. As another poster has stated, you are GIVING this information away. It's like placing a billboard to the world advertising yourself. If you don't want anyone to know that information, then why display it. This is maybe another attitude that should be examined. On top of the Government, look what happened with the Sidekick - some individual had their privacy invaded (it looks like they were caught red-handed - but where is innocent until proven guilty?). If for nothing other then the risks associated with social engineering, we shouldn't teach our children to post everything about themselves online - it is not a private medium.

The New COINTELPRO

[spun]

What is the point? Do they think terrorists are going to be putting up MySpace profiles? No, this is about finding and suppressing people who question the government. This isn't about terrorists, its about peace activists, environmentalists, socialists, libertarians, and anyone else not satisfied with the status quo. Think COINTELPRO. This has no purpose other than facilitating the suppression of dissent. To quote from the wikipedia page:

According to Brian Glick, in War at Home, COINTELPRO used a broad array of methods, including:

1. "Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main purpose was to discredit and disrupt. Their very presence served to undermine trust and scare off potential supporters. The FBI and police exploited this fear to smear genuine activists as agents." [3]

2. "Psychological Warfare From the Outside: The FBI and police used myriad other "dirty tricks" to undermine progressive movements. They planted false media stories and published bogus leaflets and other publications in the name of targeted groups. They forged correspondence, sent anonymous letters, and made anonymous telephone calls. They spread misinformation about meetings and events, set up pseudo movement groups run by government agents, and manipulated or strong-armed parents, employers, landlords, school officials and others to cause trouble for activists." [4]

3. "Harassment Through the Legal System: The FBI and police abused the legal system to harass dissidents and make them appear to be criminals. Officers of the law gave perjured testimony and presented fabricated evidence as a pretext for false arrests and wrongful imprisonment. They discriminatorily enforced tax laws and other government regulations and used conspicuous surveillance, 'investigative' interviews, and grand jury subpoenas in an effort to intimidate activists and silence their supporters."

4. "Extralegal Force and Violence: The FBI and police threatened, instigated, and themselves conducted break-ins, vandalism, assaults, and beatings. The object was to frighten dissidents and disrupt their movements. In the case of radical Black and Puerto Rican activists (and later Native Americans), these attacks--including political assassinations--were so extensive, vicious, and calculated that they can accurately be termed a form of official 'terrorism.'". [5]

This is scary. Just because this information is out there doesn't mean the government should datamine it or act on it. Even in public, one has a reasonable assumption that one won't be stalked or spied upon. Besides, this is a complete waste of resources that could go to doing soemthign effective to fight terrorism. But the powers that be honestly don't want that. If you are selling security, you have to make sure people feel insecure.

Why is this a big thing?

[Xugumad]

People to look at information posted on social networking sites. Well, duh.

Seriously, the issue is not the NSA is doing this. The issue is the NSA appears to be doing this from publically available information. Or, as the first line of the article puts it:

"I AM continually shocked and appalled at the details people voluntarily post online about themselves." So says Jon Callas, chief security officer at PGP, a Silicon Valley-based maker of encryption software.

To all american patriots:

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.fromfreedomtofascism.com/

Finding the bad guys

[gr8_phk]

Perhaps they figure the bad guys are going to lay low. You create the master social network database for the whole country and then check if people are actually in it. If you pull a guy over for speeding and he doesn't show up in the NSA database there's probably something fishy about him ;-)

Why?

[Antimatter3009]

The information they're collecting here is public as it's on the internet, but my question is why? First of all, it may or may not be accurate. People do lie on the internet. Second of all, do they really think terrorists will post incriminating evidence on MySpace? Honestly? Maybe some criminals are stupid enough to do so, but no one the NSA would be worried about. Lastly, can't they think of anything better to spend their budget on? If this is the best they can come up with, we should probably take some of their money away...

Federal Profiles

[AviLazar]

all-embracing personal profiles of individuals.

As-if the federal gov't didn't already have personal information about all of it's citizens and most non-citizens. I mean come on guys - let's not spin another scare tactic. Social Security numbers - the fed has access to your criminal records, financial records, work records, purchase records, etc. This has been the case for many many years - way before the Internet.

This is nothing new. The only thing we need to do is to make sure the gov't does not misuse the information. Yes there are cases where it has been misused, and in instances where it was maliciously done so we should punish the culprits so heavily as to scare the crap out of any would-be evil-doer. In the case of accident, fix the mistake and put in prevantative measures.

Re:This is why we're fighting against REAL ID as w

[BikerBillNH]

And if they can't get to the humans directly with RFID, they'll get to 'em through the back way, by starting with all the domesticated animals (http://usda.gov/nais/). Either way, you will be numbered, you will be cataloged, you will be tracked, and you will show your papers. Ineffectiveness notwithstanding, and inevitable ID theft be damned, to say nothing of basic liberty. The Pentagon's been hacked, the VA's been hacked, the credit companies have been hacked, the CIA can't keep track of all their laptops, etc., "But this time, we'll get it right!"
Feh. You're welcome to your handbasket, if you like, but leave me out of it, thanks...

http://nonais.org/
http://libertyark.net/
http://newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter91.htm

This has probably been posted already, but it's good...
http://news.com.com/Do+we+need+a+national+ID+card/ 2010-1029_3-6075218.html

Want more? Pay attention to Rep. Ron Paul...
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst052906.ht m

Why can't government just leave me alone? Damn the databases, bring on those FreeStaters. I just hope it's not too late...

anoNet

[Anonymous Coward]

The time for a fully encrypted network is now. Some people may say: "Well what if the NSA gets on that network?" The answer is simple, good luck to the NSA on tieing a 1.0.0.0/8 IP to a real IP / person.

Seriously folks, wake up. It is time we took the net back and anoNet is how to do it.