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 $

[Moqui]

You bring up a good point. And it is a slippery slope when talking about the survelliance and analysis of populations. I do agree with you, and am usually the first to throw up the caution flag when discussing personal liberties. However, there is a jump in level between what I post on a public website by my own hand, and cameras in the sky that monitor where I walk (though our compatriots in the London already have to deal with this).

You mention Payback schemes, by which I assume you mean "savings cards" say for cash-back on gas, or discounts on groceries (if I misunderstood, my apologies, as the rest won't apply). How do you pay for your gas or purchases? If it is with cash, then you can be relatively sure that it isn't trackable. But if you are putting it on your VISA checkcard, then not participating in the payback program really doesn't matter -- if the government wanted to find out what you purchased, the probably could by going through your purchase records on your digital money.

Re:Standard Waste of Our Tax $

[tehcyder]

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?

For a test drive of your future, just visit the UK.

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:Standard Waste of Our Tax $

[siriuskase]

As scary as this might sound, I see no reason for anyone including the NSA to be banned from using publicly available information. This isn't like demanding phone records that are normally accessable only with a warrant.

That said, I do hope they use a little common sense and realize that profiles and other statements on the internet may be wildly inaccurate. And this is one more occassion to remind users that they should post nothing that they wouldn't want just anyone to see.

Re:Standard Waste of Our Tax $

[HiThere]

Actually, I believe that Europe has many large social advantages over the US. And the adjectives that you use reflect your subjective evaluations rather than objective facts.

From various objective standards the US is in decline relative to not only Europe, but also Japan and China. China is a less desireable place to live, but they are changing in a positive direction, while the US is changing in a negative direction. Will the qualities meet? Will China become superior? This is partially determined by choices that we and our governmental entities make NOW.

We are discussing one such choice here. This one appears to be one that will make the US a less desireable country to live in, though possibly not "to rule over". I.e., the benefit to the citizenry is not equivalent to the benefit to the government. They are frequently opposites.

Re:Standard Waste of Our Tax $

[HiThere]

Perhaps you should consider how the "unemployment rate" is calculated, and be aware that different countries calculate it differently.

I'll agree with you about the proportion of male children in China being a significant negative factor, and raise you that it will decrease social stability over the next few decades. China is still improving as a place to live.

A declining population is not a negative sign, not as long as a civilization is above the long term carrying capacity of it's area. How it gets dealt with is a significant problem. (But do note that the birthrate of US born citizens is below replacement, also.)

Death spiral? My, you do take a temporary decline seriously. I'll worry when the population gets below the permanent carrying capacity, and not until them. OTOH, because of their negative attitudes towards foreign immigrants, Japan is experiencing a much steeper decline in population than the rest of the urbanized world. (Is this a purely urban phenomena, or is it based around industrial pollution, as some studies appear to show? It seems "civilization"-wide, concentrated in technical and urbanized areas, but I haven't seen any conclusive studies. At any rate, I'm not worried. We've got a long way to go before we reach a sane population level, and a declining birth-rate seems the most humane possible way to achieve it.

Remember that more than 95% or our productivity is the result of invested and shared intellectual property of our common ancestors world-wide. Don't be too quick to believe that you have some special right to much more than the average salary, or to claim that someone else should be left to starve. Now it's possible that you DO earn about what is reasonable, many people do. But many, also, take advantage of unfair laws to unfairly monopolize knowledge and resources developed by our common ancestors.

Human nature being such as it is I will grant the need for a stratified rewards system, but I really doubt that the wealthiest should be rewarded at a rate higher then 1000 times the rate of the poorest. I would consider a rate in the range of 100-200 to be much more reasonable. Welfare? What is the subsidies given to corporations but welfare for the rich and powerful? If you want to, I believe that you could make a good case that no government should be trusted with the right of preventing others from issuing competing curriencies. It would be difficult to find a less honest banker.

Welcome to..

[scsirob]

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

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:Welcome to..

[gatzke]

In 1984, people were required to have the TV spy sets in their houses to be watched. You are not required to post on MySpace or /.

In 1984, I think you could not turn off the TV. In 2006, you can turn off your computer and TV and go outside.

You are not spied on inside your house without cause, but posting on the internet is like putting a big sign up in your front yard with information availalable to the public in general. If you don't like people reading your public information, don't post online or be careful what you post or post disinformation.

Yes, the NSA probably has hooks into banks and credit cards. Don't like that? Use cash / gold / barter for transactions. Nobody forces you to pay 18% interest on a credit card. The 15 page user agreement you signed probably has something in there about sharing your information with other parties. The credit card companies sell your information to marketing firms, why not the NSA?

If you want more secure communication, use PGP for email and SSH for tunneling around encrypted.

If you want even more secure communication, tempest proof your computer.

If you want secure communication, don't use the phone or a computer, or develop a one-tim-pad system.

Just not feeling it today...

[TripMaster Monkey]

You know, as much as I'd like to get all worked up about this issue and fire off another foamy-mouthed diatribe about the pervasiveness of government surveillance, Big Brother, etc., etc., I'm having difficulty justifying it. After all, this information is being posted out there, specifically for others to view. 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.

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.

Re:Just not feeling it today...

[Billosaur]

When I was in high school in the late 60s (yes, I'm THAT old) we knew that pictures were being taken of all of us at the anti-war rallies. For those of us on a stage from time to time, we were pretty darn sure we weren't going to be allowed to run for governor any time soon.

Yes, but those pictures would be placed in a physical file, then dumped in a filing cabinet somewhere, to languish and moulder until someone thought to try and use the data in it for some purpose, where they would have to drag it out, collate and coordinate it with data from god-knows how many other files.

We're talking the use of high-speed computers running efficient data mining algorithms which could potentially sift through billions of pieces of data and track trends in matters of hours, not weeks or months. Not to mention, data would constantly be added, and the trends updated on a daily basis. And you wouldn't be going to any rallies to have this done to you -- it could swept out of your blog or right off your personal MySpace page. And even though you haven't a traitorous bone in your body, these data mining algorithms could link your data to the data gleaned from others and create what amounts to a case that you're party to something you're not.

Think of the recommendations Amazon makes when you purchase something: they track trends in the purchase of items, and make suggestions about other items that others have purchased when they purchased the item you've selected. Now take that and expand it.

Re:Just not feeling it today...

[dugjohnson]

Still, my point is not that it is right or wrong (yes, I think it is wrong), just that to think that government WON'T do that is naive. People in power, even benign power, tend to do things that we don't like. It is the very nature of power. One of the main tenets of Libertarianism is that the difference between me and the government is that the government has guns....

People in power want to stay in power. Information is power. The fact that it is more easily attainable and sortable and searchable than it was in the 60s just means that it is even MORE likely to be used than it was then. Before it was too much trouble. Now it is an interesting programming problem. And, hey, if a wonk in the government stumbles across a possible terrorist and "SAVES THE DAY!" how much better for him/her.

Government will always act to govern....govern meaning to keep within bounds. Those in power get to set the bounds. We shouldn't be surprised at a misuse of power.

First Post

[teratogenicbenzene]

First Post!

And what has the NSA learned from this?

That I'm a lazy, self-aggrandizing slashdot reader with way too much time on my hands.

Re:First Post

[maxume]

Not to mention inept...

Re:First Post

[cyber0ne]

with way too much time on my hands

That's nothing! You should see what they're finding in MY hands on the internet!

Less false positives?

[DimGeo]

If that can help reduce the false positives, I am all for it.

Hey I like it!

[hrrY]

I may *want* to be data-mined...think about the promise of a genuine advancement in online-speed-dating. Or maybe they could start a service that datea-mines, hmm, the possibilities. Although, does that include or not include those my tier? I don't date anyone outside my tier; there's principalities.

I have no problem with it

[m-wielgo]

It's about time they do it. It should help decrease real, potential threats like school shootings and child molesters.
How many times have you heard myspace on the news in a negative way? (except for "on the money", where they talk about how much it's worth) I don't mind it (NSA doing the datamining), being that you voluntarily post your information.

Public info

[truthsearch]

I have no issue with data analysis of personal information available on the web (assuming it got there legally).

But this does absolutely nothing for national security - which is the namesake of the agency. If a hate site goes up and government starts watching it to see if they're promoting violence, then fine. But creating profiles of everyone online is pointless. I'm sure they already have systems that scour the web and raise red flags. But putting my name and profile into a database at the NSA does nothing to aid security (I promise :).

Re:Public info

[Qzukk]

Right, so they arrest a bunch of random people, and when nothing happens they say "see! We did that!" When someone asks them to prove it, they whine about national security.

I've got a terrorist repellant rock that's worked just as well, it's even driven all the terrorists to Canada.

This would be unreliable

[Anonymous Coward]

So, all I have to do is pretend to be someone else and go create accounts and blogs all over the place as the person I am spoofing and the NSA would add all the bogus information I create to my targets permanent record.

or am I missing something?

This is why we're fighting against REAL ID as well

[Seth Cohn]

They've sworn up and down how they won't create a central database, but this sort of datamining is exactly what they have in mind...

Add in RFID chipped drivers licenses (not to mention the new passports which DO use RFID), and you have the making of a complete "We know who you are, who you hang out with, and where you were last night" totalitarian tracking system.

This is why many of us are moving to New Hampshire, joining the http://freestateproject.org/, and working against these things. We nearly stopped New Hampshire from participating in REALID (the Republican Senators are selling out the state for a mere $3 million...) and we're not done yet.

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.

Re:How do you sleep at night, NSA workers?

[anaesthetica]

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.

I know a guy who applied to the NSA. I don't know whether he got in, but I've known him since high school. He was a math major in college, played a lot of D&D, Lord of the Five Rings, Warhammer 40k, and World of Warcraft. For all intents and purposes he was completey apolitical. He thought he was a pagan in high school, but decided to be a nihilist by senior year after reading some Nietzsche. Now I think he's converting to Protestantism for his fiancee's family. He's also really good at DDR.

I don't really think he fits the "sociopathic, mean-spirited, fascist-minded" description you have in mind though. He was friendly, loyal, and generous as long as I knew him.

Myspace

[Rob T Firefly]

Thanks to MySpace, the NSA now knows that there are far more 18-year-old bisexual cheerleaders named Tiffany out there than anyone ever realized, there is a very good reason so many musicians never get record deals, and everyone in the entire world is in your extended social network (especially that creepy mutant Tom.)

Yes, because terrorists use MySpace

[MikeRT]

I think there needs to be an intelligence meter along the lines of one of those rollercoaster "you must be this tall to get on the ride" signs for democratic participation. Anyone who seriously believes that this sort of thing exists to fight terrorism rather than monitor the public for potential signs of rebellious behavior or personalities that might one day become political rebels would fall well below the level of participating. I don't know how they could make it more obvious that their goal is social control, not bonafide anti-terrorist.

Disagree? When was the last time that you saw a terrorist on a social network like MySpace, posting hints about their desire to terrorize others? What are the odds that they would even join, since terrorism is more difficult the more exposed you are on "the grid?"

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.

Re:The New COINTELPRO

[spun]

Way to dodge the real issue. The NSA shouldn't be spying on US citizens. The potential for abuse far outweighs the potential to stop terrorism. The Federal Government has a proven history of abusing things like this. Sorry to sound callous, but the rights of hundreds of millions of US citizens not to have their freedoms taken away trump the rights of twenty kids not to get shot up by their classmates.

Re:The New COINTELPRO

[BalanceOfJudgement]

"That is absolutely wrong. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place and anything you do or say in the bank, the convenience store, or any public space or private property open to the public is subject to monitoring and recording."

He didn't say "expectation of privacy", he said "reasonable assumption that one won't be stalked or spied upon." These are very different things. I don't expect to be able to walk around naked in a bank and scratch myself in front of the customer service rep. I DO, however, expect to not be stalked or tracked in any way other than purely random (e.g. I am not the special focus of any official observations). I DO, also, expect to be able to freely and openly exclaim my opinions about the government and political topics, without incurring special 'treatment' by secret organizations of government hitmen.

What about friends who post your information?

[retcon]

Yes, since people voluntarily place their information on these networks, that attenuates the indignation at this government data collection a bit. BUT, what about information that's put up there involuntarily? Ex: I have a facebook account (sorry), but at the least I wanted to keep a picture myself off it. But soon after, Facebook added the feature to tag pictures with the names of the people in it, and given enough data sets, an algorithm to identify myself in newer pictures! Pictures of myself popped up, appropriately tagged, shortly thereafter. I could de-tag myself on every picture, and ask each of my friends to stop, but such palliative measures are futile on the Internet...once the data's out, it's out!

I for one ...

[srobert]

...welcome our neocon overlords.

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.

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

[Seth Cohn]

Here's some video showing the rally against REAL ID here in New Hampshire.
We had a wide range of supporters, Left and Right, Atheist and Christian, all working together to help stop this....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8307405023 976923577

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.

Two Words: Chilling Effect

[Moraelin]

I'll tell you a different kind of a "in soviet russia" story, and it's not a joke. I'll tell you what kept those people in line under most totalitarian regimes. Yes, the short story is "the secret police", but that's only a very superficial view of the problem.

The communist block's secret police didn't always have the indiscriminate brutality of Stalin's black cars and summary executions. It eventually evolved into something more "subtle": the widespread idea that somewhere they have a dossier of what you've said and who you've associated with. That even if you don't land in the Gulag (but then again, you might land there anyway) for going drinking again with comrade Piotr who speaks against the government, there'll be a page in your dossier for ever flagging you as sharing Piotr's subversive views. And it someday might bite you in the ass. E.g., maybe some day you won't get a promotion, or the party's approval to go abroad (on business or holyday), or whatever, just because somewhere there's a page in your dossier saying you're a subversive element and associate with traitors.

Now they didn't have the computers or manpower to actually do that on anywhere near the scale NSA is doing it, so the probability was really low, but the chilling effect was thorough anyway. People didn't want to take risks, so they tended to shut up.

But the effect was more perverse than that. Anyone who openly spoke against the government was seen as a potential agent provocateur, trying to bait you into saying something that'll come back to haunt you later. It's the most perverse thing you can do to prevent organized resistance: make sure that people don't trust each other. The guy shouting against the government might be paid by the government, or may be someone who has a petty grudge against you and tries to get you to say something you might regret.

Basically, the the most effective threats don't have to be explicit, but vague and implicit. People don't have to know that the government will swiftly come and send them to Guantanamo for speaking against it. The most effective threat is to just have everyone know that you know everything they did and everyone they associated with, that it's for ever attached to their file somewhere, and they don't know how or when you'll use it. Maybe you'll go for direct retaliation, or maybe their son won't be able to get a government scholarship/job/whatever because of what they said, or whatever. That unknown can pretty chilling while costing very little to maintain. (A lot less than trying to execute everyone who disaggrees, and creates less martyrs.)

And all this mining phone calls and social sites (a lot do have personal information, e.g., dating sites) has the potential to create a chilling effect of epic proportions. Is John speaking out against the new fascist government? Well, then better make sure you're not on his friends list or calling him every week. You don't want to have _that_ on your file, now do you? If you're an employer, better get rid of him on your own, because otherwise, you know, that relationship goes on your file too. Plus, you know they'll make a connection every time he calls you to take a sick day, or you call him to ask why the server isn't up. Better not risk losing a fat government contract just because you're associating with and employing undesirables.

Does that have to be accurate and filtered clean of character assassination bullshit? No, it's probably better if it isn't. Might get some people thinking they already have plenty of bogus or inaccurate stuff on their file anyway, so all the more reason not to add real stuff to it too. Better keep low and try not to trip their radar, than have to explain which stuff is bogus and which isn't

Re:Two Words: Chilling Effect

[RY]

Excellent post

  Most data mining is not about the known information; it is about the unknown information. The social networks which are built online with people known only through there alias can be rather surprising.

I had the opportunity to find out what was going on in someone's life online and offline. I was able to build the targets offline life from information obtained online by using an account ID which the person had probably forgotten about. That account ID led to the first page which the person made on line which gave personal details and dates of birth. By the time the collection of information was completed the information available gave up the targets; full name, date of birth, home address, property owned and value, phone numbers, spouses full name and family members names and locations. Personal information included likes and dislikes, pets' types and names, and so forth.
The circle of online friends included a couple who were trying to get their brother in-law married.

The target had no clue of the back ground available or the connection of the social network which the target had walked into. The target had no concept of social engineering, or the fact that the target was being used.

The amount of information available publicly and through public/private information sources is amazing and amazingly accurate. It is all a matter of knowing where to look and the interpolation/conformation of the information.

Osama does!

[morgan_greywolf]

When was the last time that you saw a terrorist on a social network like MySpace, posting hints about their desire to terrorize others?

Why, just today, in fact. See? ;-)

MySpace Data Mining

[burningion]

I've seen this one coming from a mile away. Anyone with a high speed internet connection and a couple of computers (or a botnet) can data mine the entire MySpace directory. You'll get a whole lot of information from MySpace, since people are so willing to spend rediculous amounts of time looking for "friends". The real value of MySpace is in the consumer profiles they build from all your friends and the keywords you guys are into. When miss teen bopper picks that crappy song to play in her MySpace, you can be sure a record company somewhere is making a note of that. MySpace is a goldmine for marketers.

Also, what about Google Analytics? Think about that one. Google already has access to most of the world's search habits. Their search cookie expires in 2038, and that means anyone who doesn't have a clue about clearing cookies (everyone not a geek) will have a record of their searches traceable to their common ip adressess. Now with the inclusion of Analytics, Google has access to which pages people visit through sites. This is extremely dangerous. A rogue government could steal this database or force google to release it, and then they'd have a really worthwhile database. Think about it.

My $0.02? Do a search for "DemocraKey" while you still can.

The NSA is out of control...

[Futurepower(R)]

The NSA is out of control and should be stopped. Hear that, NSA?

scewing their data

[DM9290]

Do you think that a deliberate attempt to obstruct the NSA's ability to "Protect America from Terrorism" (tm) isn't illegal?

In fact, you probably already broke the law just for posting an article counseling how to obstruct the NSA datamining program.

Someone is here on a visa or is an illegal alien? They should certainly be tracked. Legal citizens? Recognize that they have inalienable essential liberties which are guaranteed by the Constitution, and using the War Powers Act to try to justify your actions is NOT legal, and is certainly not ethical. In fact, encroaching our Constitutionally-protected rights when you have taken an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution actually amounts to treason.

" We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." - Declaration of Independence

hrmm.. where in that do you read that only LEGAL CITIZENS are created equal? Or that only legal citizens are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights.

The legal premise of the nation is that rigts were endowed upon ALL by the Creator. Unless immigrants have a different creator, then they too have those fundamental rights. The Constitution does not guarantee your rights. the Constitution merely acknowledges in writing that certain of them exist and acts as a contract between the Federal Government and the States and the People that the rights will not be infringed. Contracts can be violated, and they often are. The only thing which guarantees the right may be enjoyed is the positive ACTIONS of people in defence of those rights.

Most people are far too scared to act against government action even when it breeches the contract. This would seem to be according to plan.

"Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than
feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to
be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is
much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be
dispensed with." - THE PRINCE, Nicolo Machiavelli - 1505

"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further. " - Darth Vader, "Star Wars: Episode V"

Those in power can trample whatever rights they please, and if it can frighten people out of resisting then it has successfully achieved its aim.

If the people are scared of their own government, then they are already oppressed.

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.