Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NSA Admits Searching "3 Hops" From Suspects

Posted by timothy on from the extrapolation-nation dept.

New submitter cpitman writes "In a house hearing Wednesday the NSA admitted that it could query not only a suspect's records, but also perform up to a 'three hop query'. Considering that most people in the world are separated by under 6 degrees of separation, the NSA essentially claims that any single suspect gives them rights to investigate a large chunk of the world's population. With the terror watch list having over 700,000 names, just how many times has Kevin Bacon been investigated?"

18 of 322 comments (clear)

  1. Can we discuss the fourth amendment now? by intermodal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At this revelation, it doesn't take a libertarian to point out that this isn't based on probable cause.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    1. Re:Can we discuss the fourth amendment now? by vux984 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh I dunno. If a terrorist suspects real-estate agents daughter's mechanic fixes your car don't you think the NSA should have that information?

    2. Re:Can we discuss the fourth amendment now? by Lendrick · · Score: 5, Funny

      "So what does that make us?"

      "ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Which is what you are about to become!"

    3. Re:Can we discuss the fourth amendment now? by negRo_slim · · Score: 5, Funny

      What if the fucking Real Estate Agent knows the same mechanic her daughter uses? Use your fucking head.

      --
      On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
    4. Re:Can we discuss the fourth amendment now? by vux984 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nope. The real estate agent is 1 hop. They pull all his records. The daughter is 2 hops. They pull all her records. The mechanic is 3 hops. They pull all his records.

      3 hops. The fact that the mechanic serviced your car will be captured, even though they never made the 4th hop to pull your records directly.

    5. Re:Can we discuss the fourth amendment now? by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That just proves that it's more like Brave New World than it is like 1984.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    6. Re:Can we discuss the fourth amendment now? by cold+fjord · · Score: 5, Informative

      You seem to have skipped over some key data.

      Terror watch list grows to 875,000

      As of December 2012, a factsheet from the center states, TIDE contained over 875,000 entries. Each one represents a known or suspected terrorist and includes all their known aliases and spelling variations on their name, the official said.

      Less than one percent, or fewer than 9,000, were Americans, including both citizens and legal permanent residents, he said, adding the center does not release exact numbers.

      That is a pretty small portion of both the US and world populations.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    7. Re:Can we discuss the fourth amendment now? by Jstlook · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Let's even just estimate:

      Facebook says most people really only associate with 30 'friends'.

      Hop 1: 9000 x 30 = 270k people.

      Assuming that those people have associates that overlap the existing list somehow, we arrive at:

      Hop 2: 270k x 15 + 270k= 4.32 million people

      With a conservative estimate of the last hop only adding another three to twelve people, you're still talking between:

      Hop 3: 4.32m + (4.05m x 3-12) = 16.47 million to 52.92 million people

      --
      ---jstlook ---For that is the way of Elves, for they say both yes AND no, and mean every word of it. --- J.R.R.T.
    8. Re:Can we discuss the fourth amendment now? by ldobehardcore · · Score: 5, Informative

      Mod this guy up. The NSA may not be looking for you specifically, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be mad as hell that they're violating everyone's rights. They aren't torturing you at a black site now, but they could if they wanted to, because they have conspired to make themselves above the law.

      --
      Hectice, baby, Mercator says hello to you
  2. I think what's clear by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think whats clear is that despite the apologists claims to the contrary; be they from the NSA, Administration, or Congress there was no effective oversize of these programs. Feel good political firewalls are not a strategy. Its a universal truth just about any information gathered will be turned to unintended ends. All it will ever take is some SOB come along and make the right excuses and justifications, creatively define a few terms and suddenly the laws governing the use of the data are meaningless.

    If we don't want our government to abuse this type of data the only solution bar them from getting it in the first place.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:I think what's clear by GumphMaster · · Score: 5, Funny

      there was no effective oversize of these programs.

      Actually, I think this programme is demonstrably oversized ;)

      --
      Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
  3. It's 4.74, not 6 by cultiv8 · · Score: 5, Informative

    On the internet, it's 4.74 degrees of separation.

    --
    sysadmins and parents of newborns get the same amount of sleep.
    1. Re:It's 4.74, not 6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with your thinking is that the Dunbar number is limited by our brains. The internet and the NSA do not forget.

      Remember that guy who emailed you about that craigslist posting you put up a few years ago? No? Well, the NSA does.

  4. Congress is "angry" by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The first paragraph of TFA is:

    The National Security Agency revealed to an angry congressional panel on Wednesday that its analysis of phone records and online behavior goes exponentially beyond what it had previously disclosed.

    If it's true that members of Congress are angry, that's favorable news! Maybe they can be persuaded to get off their butts and do something about this.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:Congress is "angry" by sexconker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The first paragraph of TFA is:

      The National Security Agency revealed to an angry congressional panel on Wednesday that its analysis of phone records and online behavior goes exponentially beyond what it had previously disclosed.

      If it's true that members of Congress are angry, that's favorable news! Maybe they can be persuaded to get off their butts and do something about this.

      They only thing they're angry about is the fact that people found out.

    2. Re:Congress is "angry" by Guru80 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course members of congress are "Angry"TM, so "Angry"TM that they will make sure they let everyone that matters to their election know how "Angry"TM they are. They will even get all huffy and yell and tell the room they are so "Angry"TM and it isn't acceptable. Maybe even pound their fist and wag a finger all for the "Angry"TM dramatic flair....then go out for coffee and do absolutely nothing about it.

  5. This might be of interest.. by Shoten · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Foreign Policy had a fascinating article last month on how metadata analysis is used in terms of relationships between suspected "evil" people and known "evil" people. (The word "evil" in quotes to signify that for purposes of this topic, the definition of "evil" is unimportant.) The article talks about the challenges of fewer vs. more degrees of separation in link analysis; the new revelation that they go to 3 degrees throws it into even more perspective.

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/06/17/evil_in_a_haystack_nsa_metadata

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
  6. "Admission" vs. Truth by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In a house hearing Wednesday the NSA admitted

    What cause do we have to believe them? They've been lying to us about surveillance for at least 8 years, probably much, much longer.

    Oh, right, we're just supposed to take their word for it, because they've been so goddamn trustworthy up to this point, haven't they?

    Fuck these pieces of shit. Disband their organization, and charge every single employee and contractor with high treason. It's the only way to make things right.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese