Slashdot Mirror


US Mounted 231 Offensive Cyber-operations In 2011, Runs Worldwide Botnet

An anonymous reader sends this news from the Washington Post: "U.S. intelligence services carried out 231 offensive cyber-operations in 2011, the leading edge of a clandestine campaign that embraces the Internet as a theater of spying, sabotage and war, according to top-secret documents [from Edward Snowden]. Additionally, under an extensive effort code-named GENIE, U.S. computer specialists break into foreign networks so that they can be put under surreptitious U.S. control. Budget documents say the $652 million project has placed 'covert implants,' sophisticated malware transmitted from far away, in computers, routers and firewalls on tens of thousands of machines every year, with plans to expand those numbers into the millions. ... The implants that [an NSA group called Tailored Access Operations (TAO)] creates are intended to persist through software and equipment upgrades, to copy stored data, 'harvest' communications and tunnel into other connected networks. This year TAO is working on implants that “can identify select voice conversations of interest within a target network and exfiltrate select cuts,” or excerpts, according to one budget document. In some cases, a single compromised device opens the door to hundreds or thousands of others."

367 comments

  1. wow by alienzed · · Score: 4, Funny

    that is so cool.

    --
    Never say never. Ah!! I did it again!
    1. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah. And to think that they can't secure their own networks, hence that Snowden got this out.

      Sometimes I wonder if the NSA planted some or all of this stuff to impress the hell out of the world and strike fear into the hearts of the Opposition. I mean, this is straight out of a Sci-Fi plot: Homer Simpsonvich brings one infected iPod into his FSB headquarters, and soon the whole goddamned place is full of programs that are listening in on anything in sight, autonomously making cuts to exfiltrate back to Ft. Meade, copying anything that looks interesting, and surviving whatever the Opponents do to the host machines.

    2. Re:wow by Zaldarr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not to mention fucking terrifying.

      --
      I write professional videogame reviews! http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/
    3. Re:wow by MobSwatter · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I was wondering how they can get away with charging $100 for a years worth of Norton 360 that is completely worthless against their root kit? Meet the U.S., it's not illegal if it's classified, we're the "good guys" -cough...

    4. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The budget documents don't really speak to the actual SUCCESS of these programs, or the complexity involved - it is highly likely that the vast majority of work done on this level isn't far beyond your typical high school hacker.

    5. Re:wow by Digital+Ebola · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah. And to think that they can't secure their own networks, hence that Snowden got this out.

      Sometimes I wonder if the NSA planted some or all of this stuff to impress the hell out of the world and strike fear into the hearts of the Opposition. I mean, this is straight out of a Sci-Fi plot: Homer Simpsonvich brings one infected iPod into his FSB headquarters, and soon the whole goddamned place is full of programs that are listening in on anything in sight, autonomously making cuts to exfiltrate back to Ft. Meade, copying anything that looks interesting, and surviving whatever the Opponents do to the host machines.

      Securing a network is always harder than attacking a network and you can never fully understand a person's intentions when you grant them access. I'm sure a small part of what they publish is a psyop of some kind but for the most part, yes, sci-fi is reality. We are not the only ones doing it and we may not even be the best.

      When you start to consider everyone who is "operating" on the Internet, things get really scary, really quick. The new cold war will be one of constant paranoia of an attack that can influence a piece of critical infrastructure. There have been small rumored instances but until the Hiroshima of the online world happens, it will be a constant game of shadows and you never, ever, fully know or understand an operator's capabilities.

      Sci-fi, indeed.

      --
      "Network penetration is network engineering, in reverse."
    6. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is why the critical infrastructure, whose failure could cost lives and fortunes, doesn't belong on the network. The sluice gates on the dam, the control rods in the reactor, the ventilator machine standing between granny and the reaper—none of that belongs on a network. So what if you have to pay someone to get off his ass and check an inconvenient readout manually: at least that's a job created in an otherwise machine-driven economy.

    7. Re: wow by AlephNaut · · Score: 1

      Not scary at all to me but I have very low paranoia...

    8. Re: wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *citation needed

    9. Re:wow by ron_ivi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Norton 360 that is completely worthless against their root kit?

      For all we know, Norton 360 might *be* their root kit.

    10. Re:wow by djupedal · · Score: 1

      Norton 360 that is completely worthless against their root kit?

      For all we know, Norton 360 might *be* their root kit.

      Don't look at me - I turned down a job w/Symantec. Some guy named Snowden recommended against it. Wonder what he's doing these days...

    11. Re:wow by tragedy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Considering that the US has been, in recent years espousing the theory that cyber-attacks should be treated as real acts of war, suitable for real retaliation with real weapons, I would say it's pretty terrifying.

    12. Re:wow by slick7 · · Score: 0

      that is so cool.

      231 offensive operations wow, that IS cool. Prying into the privacy of 231 million taxpaying Americans, wow now THAT is offensive. Jailing corrupt government officials, priceless!

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    13. Re:wow by thoth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So what if you have to pay someone to get off his ass and check an inconvenient readout manually: at least that's a job created in an otherwise machine-driven economy.

      But that cuts into profits and corporations have shown repeatedly they'll throw anyone/anything under the bus to maintain their profit margin.

    14. Re:wow by c0lo · · Score: 1

      that is so cool.

      GENIE's free from the lamp! And one wonders, were the Chinese showing where this TAO leads to?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    15. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So essentially the US has declared a war on everyone? Hold on while I'll go and grab my gun...

    16. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STUXNET certainly speaks to their success. Actually STUXNET was somewhat of a failure because it was detected and inflected some unintended collateral damage.

    17. Re:wow by fluffy99 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Norton 360 that is completely worthless against their root kit?

      For all we know, Norton 360 might *be* their root kit.

      So you use Kaspersky instead? You realize that it's banned by DOD because of "supply chain concerns".

    18. Re:wow by SGT+CAPSLOCK · · Score: 1

      Whether it be Microsoft Security Essentials, Norton, or any other antivirus software, it won't help.

      Didn't you read the article? Those kinds of things are only useful against mere computer viruses. These are more sophisticated.

      These are "implants"!

    19. Re:wow by temcat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, because it may contain competitor's rootkit instead of their own.

    20. Re:wow by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      an attack that can influence a piece of critical infrastructure.

      I welcome such attacks. Bring them on I say. Their "damage" will be very limited and then maybe the idiots that put things like power plants, traffic lights, dams, air traffic control systems, banks, and nuclear reactors on the internet can be fired, sued, and/or prosecuted for gross negligence. I consider such attacks to be healthy if it prevents such idiotic behavior in the future. Once you air gap all critical computer systems then there is no excuse for any of this cyberwar bullshit and morons can stop ranting about it. The internet was never intended for such systems and they have no business being connected to the world wide web. Meanwhile governments around the world can focus on knocking out World of Warcraft servers instead of dropping bombs on people. Works for me.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    21. Re:wow by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Ha! I don't have any anti-virus, so I'm completely safe from US cyber-attack!

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    22. Re:wow by Thor+Ablestar · · Score: 2

      OpenBSD?

    23. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More likely it is the DOS agent

    24. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once upon a time, sensitive information stayed on a non-internet connected LAN or even a stand alone machine. This was the most hacker proof way to go.
      What stupid monkey decided they needed to read " The Post" online when they finished intelligence work? Worse, what stupid monkey keeps it that way?
      Instincts say; a clever monkey who wants to create a situaton just like this one.
      Right now I'd blame the one who looks like a cross between a monkey and the Lucky Charms leprechaun .
      Stupid, stupid monkey.

    25. Re:wow by rainer_d · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is why the critical infrastructure, whose failure could cost lives and fortunes, doesn't belong on the network.

      Didn't help Iran when STUXNET hit, did it?
      The truth is: if you have no network-connection, people start using USB-sticks over and over - which creates a completely different attack-surface.
      Air-gapping critical infrastructure isn't a bad idea - but it can't be an excuse to not secure these system at all.

      --
      Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
    26. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. Could be more clearly stated as a concern that a manual process introduces a level of errors that automated systems do not. For example, manually viewing a readout introduces the potential for the error of misreading the readout, which can lead to NOT adjusting the system to correctly compensate. The company has to accept liability for this kind of error. With an automated system, they can sue the manufacturer and fix problems across the entire field of those systems at one time.

    27. Re:wow by Proudrooster · · Score: 1

      I agree. You know what upsets me the most from these documents is how the USA views the world. The NSA view is USA vs. world. It doesn't matter if they are an ally or declared enemy. Hack, spy, surveil, torture, bomb, do whatever you want because they aren't one of us. Oh, and if they are one of us, catch'em at an airport take their stuff and send them off USA soil so you can do as you please. As for the people that live on USA soil, we are watching you too and we have a secret letter and secret court that will do our bidding and you can't discuss it, or else.

      What the hell have we become?

    28. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No wonder the internet is so slow.

    29. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, these are Cyber Weapons which exploit publicly unknown software and hardware bugs. They have a comprehensive, multi-billion dollar program to find and archive these bugs to be used in future reconnaissance, deception or destructive-effect operations. No need for "conscious backdoors" WHATSOEVER. Just program as you would program in C and C++ and Joint Strategic Cyberspace Comannd (made the name up; whatever it will be actually called, it is part of a Joint-services, strategic command) will be 100% happy with you.

      Sources:

      A) http://m.infoworld.com/d/security/in-his-own-words-confessions-of-cyber-warrior-222266

      B) General Dempsey's recent quiz at congress

      C) Stuxnet

      D) Google fuzzing Adobe Flash and finding DOZENS Of bugs by a single engineer in weeks.

      My dear Russkies, you better get off your lazy asses and stop boozing or they will have all your 150 million asses on a plate quite quickly this way. Your nice little S-400 might be toast and your Topol-M might be a hunk of metal and not a weapon, if you don't step up to this threat. And me, I don't like to live in a unipolar world, thank you.

      Well, yeah, why can't we humans embrace each other and be rational ? Why do we have to breed and consume like mad ? Why can't everybody learn from the Chinese how to control population ? Regardless of ideological differences, population pressure creates aggression, creates war. Instead of dreaming up more weapons, more ways to snoop and kill, to strategically threaten each other, why don't we talk Birth Control. Especially in Arabia and Africa, where Population Pressure creates the fertile ground for extremism.

    30. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like it's time to start seriously making tinfoil hats.

    31. Re: wow by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      you seem to be full from paranoia of being safe ad having privacy...

    32. Re:wow by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Securing a network is always harder than attacking a network and you can never fully understand a person's intentions when you grant them access.

      Indeed this is a principle true in any form of warfare. The attacker gets to choose where to attack. Inevitably the attackers greatest strength is brought to bear on the defender's greatest weakness. Victory usually goes to whatever side can maintain the initiative.

    33. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is why said infrastructure belongs on it's OWN physically separated network.

      YES, I understand the cost of doing that. We're doubling established network infrastructure!

      In response I ask this: which cost is higher? The cost to do THAT, or the cost of keeping it as is, 'securing it', and playing perpetual whack a mole against foreign states and citizen hooligans.

      I thought, or perhaps my naivete is showing, that something as important as critical infrastructure, would be purposefully secured for the long-term future. ONLY way I see of doing that is physical network isolation from the current Internet.

      IF this is such a threat, and requiring such vasts amounts of money, why haven't they gone to an physically isolated network? I'd speculate, but if you're reading this you likely know the answer, same as I do.

    34. Re:wow by cavreader · · Score: 1

      Their network wasn't hacked. The guy was a system admin with password lists, administrator level security rights, and physical access. The PRISM information came from a PowerPoint presentation and contained no technical details on how the system described was actually implemented. The PP presentation looked more like a presentation used to garner additional funding. Securing this type of funding always leads to promising a whole host of shit upfront but in reality the promises tend to come up short. The latest claims are based on a budget document that contained no technical or operational details. How much more data can be released about US foreign intelligence service activities is it going to take to move Snowden from a whistleblower hoping to enlighten US citizens to a full fledged traitor. If he keeps it up even Russia won't be able to protect him. If you believe the US should not have any foreign intelligence activities I am sure they will close down the shop as soon as every other country in the world does.

    35. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      disable autorun anyone?

    36. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you use Kaspersky instead? You realize that it's banned by DOD because of "supply chain concerns".

      And you trust a statement from DOD?

      As far as we know DOD might have banned it because its the only antivirus that keeps computers safe from their root-kit.

    37. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I worked in secure systems, 30 years ago (can't tell you more or I'd have to kill you) it was axiomatic that any computer connected to a network was *not* secure.

    38. Re:wow by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      It is fine to have it on A network, not just THE network.

      CAT-6 cable comes in many different colours. Easiest way to implement 2 (or more) networks.
      And strictly single use computers attached to the secure networks.

    39. Re:wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 2

      So what if you have to pay someone to get off his ass and check an inconvenient readout manually: at least that's a job created in an otherwise machine-driven economy.

      Unfortunately, it isn't that simple.

      As an example, take an ICU ward. There may more than a dozen of pieces of equipment connected to a patient. First problem: there is a lack of skilled people who can read those machines. You would essentially need a highly trained person sitting in the room with them staring at each one. According to a 2009 article there are 100,000 beds so that would be another 100,000 people. Considering the nursing shortage that seems impossible.

      Next problem: Humans can't process the amount of information the computer can. The computer will be processing data from all those medical instruments in realtime, and it might make a split-second decision to notify a caregiver that something is wrong. Even a human in the room looking at all those readouts couldn't do what the computers can. Not that a human can watch all those dials and guages for an entire shift without zoning out now and then. If they were making rounds to the rooms, they might miss the critical moment and the patient could be dead before they get back to the room and see. Plus, there might be a machine running a blood culture that is 10 minutes walk away. They can't keep their eyes on that too.

      Better to feed that data to a central point, and let the human monitor it from one central point. But that requires a network. Worse yet, perhaps the hospital is in a rural area and they may not have the personnel 24/7. So why not send the data to a more populated area 50 miles away, where there are enough people to monitor. But now we not only have a network, but we need a WAN.

      This is the kind of problem hospital administrators have to face every day. There are lives on the line. Don't envy that position, and don't pretend that it is easy.

    40. Re: wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Again, FAIL. see Stuxnet!!
      The Iranian network was "off the grid". So the weak link was human intervention.!!!
      A USB drive brought in by a German Siemens engenier infected the Rotationsl Control and stability modules on the Centrifuges.
      While the centrifuges were spinning out of control. The Rotationsl Control and stability modules were sending data showing everything was "honky dory". Untill the centrifuges were spinning so fast that they failed out of control.
      I can only imagine the confusion at the factory. This should have been a wonderful site to see. And all the radioactive material flying everywhere...

    41. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont think anyone is suggesting these machines be completely cut off from other machines around it. What's wrong with having an internal network that is not accessible from the outside? There's no need to use usb sticks since all your work should be taking place on the company's internal network. STUXNET happened because of shitty security procedures. When you work for the US gov in computer intel specifically you don't get to take anything in with you, much less a usb stick. That was the case before all these leakers and its especially the case now post Manning and Snowden. A USB-stick attack is still a whole different thing compared to an attack over the internet. One can be done by an automated program under the best circumstances and the other requires direct physical access to both the computer system and the company that owns it (so you probably need to be an employee). Over the internet is a much more likely attack vector and it should therefore be the priority when securing your system.

      While no security measure is perfect that isn't a reason in itself to forgo tighter security measures. People can still memorize classified material and pass it on themselves but that's no reason to deny all humans access to classified info. It's not rocket science either. It should be common sense not to have our most sensitive and critical industrial control systems accessible by the rest of the world over the internet. If your company leaves classified documents on an internet-facing machine it almost deserves to have those documents stolen.

    42. Re:wow by Gogo0 · · Score: 1

      actually that was a DoD initiative in 2007. now there are host-based security system clients on every computer to keep USB mass storage disabled and attempts to use it logged. doesnt help when you boot into a livecd, though.

    43. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At which point you make sure your critical equipment isn't online and has no external ports of any kind and that the equipment doesn't need them to run.

      Let the network maintenance be done without them, a proper maintenance man knows how to open a box to install extra hardware for temporary read/write abilities and remove it afterwards.

      Lock them damn things down and make sure standard hardware won't work from outside the box.

    44. Re:wow by gottabeme · · Score: 2

      Air-gapping is part of securing critical infrastructure. A major part. Or it should be.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    45. Re:wow by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      Your example is not an example of an ICU ward. An ICU ward is not one nurse watching a screen of heart monitors and going on 10-minute walks across the hospital to pick up lab test results. An ICU ward is a room of patients in critical condition staffed by dedicated personnel who can quickly run to any patient when their monitoring equipment starts to sound a loud alarm.

      Worse yet, perhaps the hospital is in a rural area and they may not have the personnel 24/7...

      So a hospital with only patients, no staff? That's called Home Health with LifeAlert. Where do you come up with this stuff? You're making no sense at all.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    46. Re:wow by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      Password lists?

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    47. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...the whole goddamned place is full of programs that are listening in on anything in sight...

      As long as they can only hear what they can see, we're probably safe. Turn off that webcam, Miss Jones, let's have a little privacy.

    48. Re:wow by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      actually that was a DoD initiative in 2007. now there are host-based security system clients on every computer to keep USB mass storage disabled and attempts to use it logged. doesnt help when you boot into a livecd, though.

      Apple no longer makes computers that have optical drives. How long do you think it will be before the rest of the industry follows suit?

      (Those who need them can of course still connect external optical drives.)

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    49. Re:wow by Phroggy · · Score: 2

      Considering that the US has been, in recent years espousing the theory that cyber-attacks should be treated as real acts of war, suitable for real retaliation with real weapons, I would say it's pretty terrifying.

      I wonder if it has occurred to anyone that the NSA's actions in other countries could be construed as acts of war....

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    50. Re:wow by Gogo0 · · Score: 1

      there is that of course, or plugging another hard drive into the SATA and booting from it, or a million other ways. point being, insider threat cannot ever be 100% mitigated. in the end it all boils down to a level of trust.

    51. Re:wow by cavreader · · Score: 1

      Auto regenerated passwords every day on multiple machines. Write them down. There is your list.

    52. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course now. Only enemies of America can commit crimes. 'Murica itself is immune.

    53. Re:wow by TheRealLifeboy · · Score: 1

      Why the freakin' hell are the all still running Windows??? I'm constantly stupendified by the stupidity of these so called experts that put these systems in place. If I had to run critical infrstructure it would be open source all the way and I would have forensics experts combing the code and comms for leaks, backdoors and vulnerabilities.

      <shakes head and walks away>

    54. Re: wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm no advocate of openly connecting control systems but we as consumers drive these connections with demand for service. We expect to log into the power company website and see our current usage or drill down to see exactly what sites are affected by a blackout. These things take interconnections between the control system and the corporate. It's nice to talk about complete isolation but not as easy as it sounds.

    55. Re:wow by sabbede · · Score: 0
      I know!

      But more than anything, I'm glad that its not just China doing it. Wouldn't want a botnet-gap.

    56. Re:wow by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Unlikely, most rootkits would go to great lengths to not impact performance, thus not be noticeable. Norton 360 seems to have been designed with the opposite goal in mind.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    57. Re:wow by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      An ICU ward is a room of patients in critical condition staffed by dedicated personnel who can quickly run to any patient when their monitoring equipment starts to sound a loud alarm.

      Agreed. My point still stands. Those dedicated personnel can't do it all without a computer and a network. In some cases, it is even a WAN.

      Yeah, my second example wasn't so great. But I didn't make this up. :-) Here is one example of I am referring to:
      Philips EICU

    58. Re:wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what if you have to pay someone to get off his ass and check an inconvenient readout manually: at least that's a job created in an otherwise machine-driven economy.

      But that cuts into profits and corporations have shown repeatedly they'll throw anyone/anything under the bus to maintain their profit margin.

      stop. just stop

      1) automation extends human reach; therefore more lives are saved with connectivity.
      2) PEOPLE work in corporations. there as inherently evil as you are. there's nothing about a corporate badge that suddenly changes human nature

    59. Re:wow by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Do they actually use schemes like that? I don't think I've heard that recommended as a good idea before.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    60. Re:wow by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      You're still generalizing. I think those dedicated personnel could do it just fine without computers (i.e. general purpose computers) or a network. For example, heart monitors with loud klaxons don't need to be hooked up to an aggregating display over a network. In fact, one could argue that it's better to do it this way, because it's a less complex and more compartmentalized system and therefore less prone to failure (especially unnoticed failure).

      The eICU Program clinically transforms the ICU, using a proactive care model that provides a solution to growing physician and nurse shortages while dramatically improving quality of care. Through an ideal blend of medicine with technology, this care model leverages clinical expertise, patented processes, and cutting-edge technologies to improve critical care delivery.

      ...I still don't know what that does, and looking at their "program overview" page was even less informative. I have a feeling that it's mostly mumbo-jumbo designed to sucker hospitals into spending more money, raising the cost of health care and medical insurance, and further depersonalizing medicine by putting more technology between patients and doctors. But I could be wrong.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
  2. Allies? by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Allies, "ALLIES", we don't need no stinkin' Allies. All of it, ALL OF IT, ours, we, want it all, exploit it, burn it, the whole world, it's ours, Ours, OURS.

    Seriously out of control. Looks like Chinese hardware is the least of the worlds problems. With the US Stupidity Services trying to purposefully break everyone's networks and insert back doors that only they, and their contractors, and anyone who wants to pay those contractors knows about.

    Morons there is no such thing as an exclusive back door. Once you broken the security of other countries networks, you leave access for anyone waiting to exploit, bet anything you like those morons did not at all to monitor and ensure those back doors were not exploited by others. I wonder how many times now the US government has blatantly lied about cyber attacks they launched that have been discovered and then blamed on other countries and pseudo organisation like Anonymous.

    How many attacks have they launched they were designed to do nothing else but increase their budget?

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    1. Re:Allies? by NoKaOi · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Personally, I take comfort in knowing that this will only be used against foreigner's computers, since I am a US citizen. Just like how we were assured the collection of phone data only applied to foreigners. Damn it, why does my CPU usage keep spiking?

    2. Re: Allies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn it, why does my CPU usage keep spiking?

      That's just your computer agreeing with your comfortable assesment of the situation ;-)

    3. Re:Allies? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many times now the US government has blatantly lied about cyber attacks they launched that have been discovered and then blamed on other countries and pseudo organisation like Anonymous.

      I wonder how many attacks by the Chines, Russians, North Koreans, and Iranians you have blamed on the US? Does anyone in the world do disagreeable things besides the US, in your mind?

      --
      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
    4. Re:Allies? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

      I wonder how many times now the US government has blatantly lied about cyber attacks they launched that have been discovered and then blamed on other countries and pseudo organisation like Anonymous.

      I myself have always regarded Anonymous as perhaps the ultimate expression of the old saying, "When four sit down to conspire, three are fools and the fourth is a government agent."

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    5. Re:Allies? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many attacks by the Chines, Russians, North Koreans, and Iranians you have blamed on the US?

      Could this be an "argumentum ad micturio praelium" ("pissing contest" argumentation, a lower cousin of ad populum)???
      Nah, you are correct: cannot exclude attacks from others, but...

      Does anyone in the world do disagreeable things besides the US, in your mind?

      Slipping on the trolling side already? The OP didn't say others aren't doing it, just that:
      * he sees what others are doing as a smaller concern in comparing with US (see "Looks like Chinese hardware is the least of the worlds problems")
      * he cannot rule out false flag operations from the US spooks side.
      Feel free to disagree, but... come on, you should be able to do better than building strawmen.

      Ah, oh... would this be punishing your ordinary views somehow?
      My apologies, I don't intend to curtail your right of free speech, even I don't feel any compulsion to show my commitment to it

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    6. Re:Allies? by nurb432 · · Score: 0

      With the US Stupidity Services trying to purposefully break everyone's networks and insert back doors that only they, and their contractors, and anyone who wants to pay those contractors knows about.

      Ok, you don't like the USA, we get it. But don't toss stones, as EVERY first world nation is doing this. Where you live is no more 'innocent'.. Glass houses and all that stuff ya know.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    7. Re:Allies? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I'm certain you must be interesting when taken in small enough doses.

      --
      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
    8. Re:Allies? by erikkemperman · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many attacks by the Chines, Russians, North Koreans, and Iranians you have blamed on the US? Does anyone in the world do disagreeable things besides the US, in your mind?

      And have you, and other NSA cheerleaders, not bitched and moaned about it every single time anyone suggested they were being hacked from China or Russia? Now that it turns out to be hypocrisy, as in the US are doing much the same on a massive scale, it suddenly serves as an argument in their defense?

      Just checking.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    9. Re:Allies? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      I'm certain you must be interesting when taken in small enough doses.

      Smaller doses is why it remained so much of me. About 90 kilos.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    10. Re:Allies? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1, Informative

      John Bolton has a more nuanced view. No doubt you will disagree.

      --
      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
    11. Re:Allies? by Tom · · Score: 1

      Morons there is no such thing as an exclusive back door. Once you broken the security of other countries networks, you leave access for anyone waiting to exploit, bet anything you like those morons did not at all to monitor and ensure those back doors were not exploited by others.

      That's not true.

      We know of malware that not only uses keyed and encrypted command channels, but also patches the hole it came through. You see, lots of criminals have also decided that once your computers is theirs, it should stay theirs and not fall to the next competitor coming along.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    12. Re:Allies? by erikkemperman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      John Bolton [theguardian.com] has a more nuanced view. No doubt you will disagree.

      I'm not particularly nuanced, I don't suppose. Point taken. But are you now posting op-eds in support of your claim? By John Bolton, no less... The pinnacle of nuance, to be sure. But all right, rather than shoot the messenger, which would be easy here, let's look at what he wrote. (Note to others, the following quotes are Bolton, not cold fjord)

      Snowden initially violated his oath to safeguard the national security secrets entrusted to him by revealing National Security Agency (NSA) programs arguably affecting the privacy of US citizens

      Conventiently not mentioning his other, more fundamental, oath to protect the US constitution? Also, "arguably affecting the privacy"... We can omit the "arguably" here, it seems to me; that has been Snowden's main point (which has not been creditably disputed, as far as I know).

      Snowden's sympathizers and anti-American activists have so far largely controlled his story line

      Cleverly mentioning "Snowden sympathizers" and "anti-American activists" in close conjunction. The implication being, without actually demonstrating, that they are one and the same. Echoes of Al-Qaeda and Iraq, a decade ago. Bolton's statement that these have "controlled the story line" is arguably true, but not for lack of trying.

      We do not yet know whether Snowden jeopardized US agents, but vital sources and methods of intelligence gathering and operations are clearly at risk

      Hm, that contradicts the point you were making about how thousands of operatives were already in grave danger. Although I suppose you will say that you were talking about UK operatives. Ok, I'll give you that, sort of.

      Snowden has given Beijing something it couldn't achieve on its own: moral equivalence. Now, China can portray itself as a victim, besieged by America, and simply trying to defend itself.

      Do you really not see the hypocrisy here? For years the West has accused China and Russia of doing exactly what they were themselves doing all along. So the "damage" here is that the falsely claimed moral highground is now exposed as dishonest fiction.

      Snowden's initial leaks on NSA programs also caused substantial political harm, above and beyond the intelligence damage. Several European governments which co-operated with the US are now predictably running for the tall grass, endangering the continuity of existing programs and damaging prospects for future co-operation

      Again, taking for granted that *of course* the US were spying on allies, this doesn't even need defending in Bolton's world. The damage is in showing the hypocrisy. Bolton thinks this is a wonderful argument, I say that this statement, coming from a senior US (ex)official, just discredits US diplomacy even further.

      As with the Bradley Manning/WikiLeaks exposure of thousands of classified State Department and Pentagon cables, Europeans want to know why Washington can't protect sensitive information.

      False, Europeans want to know why their supposed partners in Washington are treating them like adversaries. The bulk of the cables, I might add, turned out to be "embarrassing" rather than "dangerous" to the US.

      But Beijing does not deserve moral equivalence, given the intensity of its cyber-attacks against America. The key point is that China struck first, developing a pronounced asymmetric advantage.

      I don't know who struck first, if that even makes sense, but I notice Bolton doesn't give any argument to support his claim. What has been revealed though, is that the West was striking for a long time while publicly denying it.

      Then he does a bit of character assassination, I am in no position to judge either way. My personal impression, though it should not count for much, is that Snowd

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    13. Re:Allies? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      John Bolton has a more nuanced view. No doubt you will disagree.

      2 wrongs != 1 right (China hacking does not excuse US hacking)

      Besides, John Bolton who?!? Do you subscribe to his views?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    14. Re:Allies? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Maybe some of those foreigners whose rights the US doesn't give a shit about are retaliating. Suddenly all those claims of Chinese state sponsored hacking look like self defence, with ordinary US citizens and businesses on the front line.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    15. Re:Allies? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Someone seems to think that comment was funny, but it was not intended as humour.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    16. Re:Allies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nuanced? More like shill/propagandist.

    17. Re: Allies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe two wrongs don't make a right, but bringing a knife to a gunfight is a good way to end up dead.

    18. Re:Allies? by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      The NSA is employing a lot of very clever techies to do all this stuff. In addition to being very clever, these techies also have another common trait: a flexible sense of ethics that allows them to take money (salary, wages) to do stuff that others regard as evil or dirty.

      What is preventing these persons from also taking money from criminal organizations or other governments for the products of their expertise? How much is the code for installing a back door that knows how to close itself worth to the Syrian Electronic Army? To the Columbian drug cartel? Just how flexible are their moral fibers?

      Does anyone really think that Snowden is the one and only person in the NSA who figured out how to smuggle a copy of highly marketable merchandise out of the NSA? Is it not much more likely that Snowden is just the only one who chose to give the stuff away rather than selling it quietly?

      We can set the ethical arguments about what the NSA has been doing aside since there is a very strong pragmatic argument that this nest of vipers should be destroyed. In creating the NSA, the USA has created a monster it cannot control, whose products will be used to attack every USA interest, and every USA corporation, before all is done; if it is left alone. The only possible way the USA can now secure the findings and the code that the NSA develops is to yank every NSA employee off the street and confine the bunch of them in Gitmo, without benefit of due process, for as long as the software they have learned to compromise remains in use. So, like maybe ten or twenty years.

      --
      Will
    19. Re:Allies? by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Morons there is no such thing as an exclusive back door. Once you broken the security of other countries networks, you leave access for anyone waiting to exploit, bet anything you like those morons did not at all to monitor and ensure those back doors were not exploited by others.

      I get what you're saying, but those back doors wouldn't be there if the OS weren't exploitable in the first place. If anything I suspect that things were left more secure following the intrusion than before. They're just vulnerable to a different form of attack now (one that doesn't really concern the US - these aren't their networks they're messing with).

    20. Re:Allies? by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 1

      don't toss stones, as EVERY first world nation is doing this. Where you live is no more 'innocent'..

      That's complete bullshit: #1 you have no fucking clue what other intelligence agencies are doing or not, and #2 there are good reasons to believe that most other nations don't even remotely have the budget to pull this off, and #3 policies and intel priorities differ vastly from nation to nation.

    21. Re:Allies? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Conventiently not mentioning his other, more fundamental, oath to protect the US constitution?

      I don't believe that contractors swear an oath to protect the Constitution, and even if they did, who did Snowden vet his personal interpretation of the Constitution with? Nobody, I expect. Assuming his intentions were actually "good," he just decided he didn't like it and broke the law. As to the constitutionality of the programs, Professor Geoffrey Stone of the University of Chicago Law School has some views on that.

      Also, "arguably affecting the privacy"... We can omit the "arguably" here, it seems to me; that has been Snowden's main point (which has not been creditably disputed, as far as I know).

      That's something of a philosophical question. If they collect and large amounts of data, which the phone company already has, but only look when they have a warrant, is it an invasion of privacy? Is it collection and storage that is a violation, or is it where there is a person looking at the data? I would say the looking. I can certainly understand how the storing would be an uncomfortable point.

      But as to Snowden, it is clear at this point that he went way beyond questions of privacy in what he grabbed. He disclosed information on anti-terrorism operations, such as against Bin Laden and others. That has nothing to do with the privacy of American citizens.

      Cleverly mentioning "Snowden sympathizers" and "anti-American activists" in close conjunction. The implication being, without actually demonstrating, that they are one and the same. Echoes of Al-Qaeda and Iraq, a decade ago. Bolton's statement that these have "controlled the story line" is arguably true, but not for lack of trying.

      No, it is pretty straight forward that Snowden sympathizers and anti-American activists are overlapping groups, but not the same despite your claim. I don't believe that the US government ever claimed that Iraq was involved in 9/11 as part of the plot. Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism, that is beyond dispute. There were contacts between the members of the Iraqi government and al Qaida members. Al Qaida members were present in Iraq.

      Hm, that contradicts the point you were making about how thousands of operatives were already in grave danger. Although I suppose you will say that you were talking about UK operatives. Ok, I'll give you that, sort of.

      Actually I'm completely correct. Bolton was referring to US agents, I referred to British agents. I don't believe the actual number of agents was revealed.

      Do you really not see the hypocrisy here? For years the West has accused China and Russia of doing exactly what they were themselves doing all along. So the "damage" here is that the falsely claimed moral highground is now exposed as dishonest fiction.

      Was the West, the US, doing it all along? I don't think that has been established. I think it is also highly doubtful that the US or any country in the West has strong human intelligence in either China or Russia, certainly not to the degree they have on the US or Europe. The history seems to indicate that Eastern Block nations and China were pursuing computer espionage much more seriously long before the US or Europe. If you haven't, you should read The Cuckoo's Egg about an early documented case in the 80s. The author had a difficult time getting the gov

      --
      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
    22. Re:Allies? by ron_ivi · · Score: 1

      "When four sit down to conspire, three are fools and the fourth is a government agent."

      Far more than that.

      One in 4 are FBI informants - and that's just a single agency inside the DOJ. And DHS and DOD spend far more on this kind of work.

      When 4 Anons get together, I suspect it's most likely this combo:

      1. 1 DoJ (FBI)
      2. 1 DHS (United States Cyber Command)
      3. 1 DoD (NSA or CIA)
      4. 1 Chinese Military.

      And once they figure out that they can't bust each other, they recruit some script kiddies instead.

    23. Re:Allies? by Omestes · · Score: 2

      don't believe that contractors swear an oath to protect the Constitution, and even if they did, who did Snowden vet his personal interpretation of the Constitution with? Nobody, I expect. Assuming his intentions were actually "good," he just decided he didn't like it and broke the law. As to the constitutionality of the programs, Professor Geoffrey Stone of the University of Chicago Law School has some views on that [volokh.com].

      I don't know about his duty to the constitution, but in my view he acted ethically, if not legally. He saw something that he thought was wrong, and harmful to others, and tried to stop it. To me this is a higher good than merely protecting the Constitution. I would hope that everyone would do the same, if in his shoes, or in like situations. This is especially true in situtations like this, where no one who matters (i.e. not the powers that be) are likely to be harmed.

      As for embarrassment... Big whoop. If you don't want to be embarrassed, don't do anything embarrassing. If your action bite you in the ass eventually, that is your own fault, and you don't get my sympathy. Especially when it is a Government operating outside their purview (the will, and welfare of the American people). I don't give a shit if it is "my" government, or a "bad" government like China, the standards of judgement are the same. An act is evil, or good, no matter who commits it. I fail in nationalism, surely, but history has taught me that nationalism is rarely a good thing.

      Snowden is likely an asset of Russian intelligence.

      If there is any proof of this, then it is worth talking about. If not, it is base speculation and not really worth entertaining. Might as well say that Snowden is working for the greys, to take power from the lizard aliens who control the American government. Both statements are pretty much equivalent at this point, being somewhat meaningless conspiracy theories. That said, their might be more than meets the eye with the Russian connection, but until there is some information it is pointless to speculate. We're also dealing with intelligence communities, so whose to say that most of the information on this tract isn't psyops, or whatever?

      I wouldn't rush to judgment that the Snowden leaks are a good thing. The West may come to regret them greatly. These revelations will be playing out in events over the course of years.

      My government might regret them. I won't. Even if they are of dubious origin, if they are true, then we deserve the egg in our face. And further, those that permitted this state of affairs should face some consequences. Even if this isn't good for my country, or me personally, I'm find with whatever fallout there may be, since consequences are always deserved for bad behavior. This is probably a rare point of view, but I'll stick with it. Ethics trump power, at least in my book.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    24. Re: Allies? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Maybe two wrongs don't make a right, but bringing a knife to a gunfight is a good way to end up dead.

      In this context, bringing a bullet proof vest might have been more beneficial than bringing an entire arsenal.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    25. Re:Allies? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Apparently you are the one that lives in a fantasy world, and not myself. But go ahead, the watchers prefer people like you.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    26. Re:Allies? by Tom · · Score: 1

      What is preventing these persons from also taking money from criminal organizations or other governments for the products of their expertise?

      How about working for the secret service of a government that has demonstrated that it isn't above killing people without trial if it thinks they're a danger?

      I wouldn't want to be on the shitlist of the NSA, not for a year or so worth of salary. Snowden had a motivation that goes way beyond money. You'd need something like that.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  3. I Oppose the Cyber-War... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but I support the hackers.

    1. Re:I Oppose the Cyber-War... by c0lo · · Score: 2

      I Oppose the Cyber-War...but I support the hackers.

      an ethical US citizen which pays taxes?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  4. As a taxpayer, I'm comfortable employing BLACKHATS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not like we're paying for killers for profit, right?

  5. Bad USA by mfh · · Score: 1

    Vulgar display of power.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:Bad USA by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      > Vulgar display of power.

      These programs are secret. That makes them, by definition, not a display of anything.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:Bad USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great album.

    3. Re:Bad USA by Mitchell314 · · Score: 1

      Music reference.

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    4. Re:Bad USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You left your dentures in the refrigerator again, old timer...

    5. Re:Bad USA by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      They are a display of their secrecy.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  6. Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by elucido · · Score: 3, Informative

    Who believes the US government had something to do with it?
    Suddenly after meeting with regulators the price recovers?
    Conclusion: Promote regulation of the Bitcoin network as it's correlated with a rise in the price.

    1. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and nobody cared

    2. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the NSA want to, they could easily dominate the bitcoin mining with their computers,

    3. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't they want to, exactly? That sounds like as good a use or better than 99% of what they're ending up DOING!

    4. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the NSA want to, they could easily dominate the bitcoin mining with their computers,

      Why don't they want to, exactly?

      Because the intelligence community knows how worthless Bitcoin is.

    5. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't they want to, exactly? That sounds like as good a use or better than 99% of what they're ending up DOING!

      Because nobody with intelligence uses Bitcoin.

    6. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The entry level job of total real world tracking it is probably worth more as educational exercise than any other actions.
      Its global, the crypto glows and now show your teacher you can work with the big data sets in real time....

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US has taken down Iraq (planned to stop using dollars for oil), Libya (planned to stop using dollars for oil), the Euro (once seen as an alternative to the dollar) and is targeting Iran (which also planned to stop using dollars for oil).

      The US will collapse when other countries no longer have to buy US dollars for oil.

      It is that simple. Any realistic alternative to the US dollar will be targeted.

    8. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by jon3k · · Score: 1

      Why mine bitcoins when they can just login to your computer later and download yours :)

    9. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a load of bullshit. The Euro has taken itself down. The Euro area is an assortment of honest, hard working, disciplined, warrior-style peoples (generally north of the Alps) and the worst of the lazies, liars and conspirators the world has ever seen. Just read what General Patton had to say about Germans.

      The southern leeches are destroying the Euro and the northern economies with them, if we Germans don't quickly get back to the Deutsche Mark. 70% of Europeans are simply lazy, scheming, cynical bastards and are always on the lookout for slaves to do the real work. Good riddance to the "Euro".

    10. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      If the US wanted bitcoin gone, they could have done so.

      There exists something called an "51% attack", which means that anybody having more than half the hashrate of the Network is acknowledged as the boss and can do as he wants (stuff like spending the same bitcoin multiple times, manipulate the difficulty of future block mining, etc).

      Back in April, before mass ASICS, the US could have trivially gotten that far. Hell, last year anybody willing to spend 5-10 million could have done it with off-the-counter hardware.

      For an agencies who have a double digit BILLION black budgets, this is totally peanuts.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    11. Re: Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Euro is doing well.

      Dollar on the other hand is slowly imploding. Massive debt which can never be paid back. Cities bankrupt. Rampant corruption.

      The attempt on Euro failed.

      The debt ceiling will be reached later this year in the USA... When this happens, the dollar endgame begins, shit will hit the fan. Expect more bankruptcies and people with guns on the street, desperate and nothing to lose.

    12. Re:Conspiracy theory: Bitcoin crash of April 2013 by elucido · · Score: 1

      If the US wanted bitcoin gone, they could have done so.

      There exists something called an "51% attack", which means that anybody having more than half the hashrate of the Network is acknowledged as the boss and can do as he wants (stuff like spending the same bitcoin multiple times, manipulate the difficulty of future block mining, etc).

      Back in April, before mass ASICS, the US could have trivially gotten that far. Hell, last year anybody willing to spend 5-10 million could have done it with off-the-counter hardware.

      For an agencies who have a double digit BILLION black budgets, this is totally peanuts.

      Never implied they want it gone, but as a bargaining chip for regulation perhaps they have the kill switch.

  7. holy shit by Laxori666 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Time for me to destroy my webcam and make sure no device on my computer has a microphone.

    1. Re:holy shit by wmac1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then you shouldn't take and store photos and videos (obviously using and on your computer). You shouldn't use phone (since it has a microphone and possibly camera).. You shouldn't use Windows, ... and Android, ...oh and Linux and almost every connected device and software.

      Basically it is a frightening fact that we can hardly run from ubiquitous surveillance since the whole connected electronics devices can be used for spying on us. Unless you leave in a farm, do not have communication devices and spend cash only. But I doubt even that would be enough.

      Can we have Orwell's 1984 instead?

    2. Re:holy shit by antdude · · Score: 1

      So you would open your laptops/notebooks to avoid their warranties? Better, just stop using electronics. :)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    3. Re:holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time for me to destroy my webcam and make sure no device on my computer has a microphone.

      If they wanted to bug you, they'd just hit up your home while you were away.

      I don't think you understood what was revealed here, they can bug network equipment (no shit).

    4. Re:holy shit by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 1

      Still won't work. If you go completely off the grid they'll notice that too. It's best to hide in plain sight. Keep your facebook profile open to the world but full of "TGIF" posts and pictures of your cats/kids. Keep an expected flow of cash going through your credit cards / bank account. Keep your head down. Don't post advice on how to avoid the NSA to semi-popular news sites even if they are well past their prime.

    5. Re:holy shit by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Fighting back seems like the only reasonable option. We are under attack by a military, after all, so as far as I'm concerned it's open season on the US. The problem is that unlike the real world where things take time to escalate in cyber wars one pissed off guy can cyber-nuke in retaliation by taking out some critical infrastructure.

      I think the US just assumed it would be a cyber superpower as well, but actually it's probably one of the most vulnerably countries in the world. Predictions of a cyber pearl harbour could be right, but only because the US is provoking it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can we have Orwell's 1984 instead?

      You already have "Animal Farm". Don't be greedy.

    7. Re:holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mention living on a farm. I'd like to invite anyone that wants to, to quit their job and farm at home. If neighborhoods cooperate, it'd be very easy to grow your own food, and it's even easier to stop paying on your mortgage. Then, you know, who needs money? Get used to living without AC in the summer. Learn to build a fire in the winter. All of these "tools" that have been around for so many years aren't a requirement for life as we know it. Of course, this would fail big time unless over 70% of the people in $theCountry did it. Self governing sounds so free.

    8. Re:holy shit by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      I was thinking about it too. If you can produce some product you may even be able to earn some cash and produce enough electricity for non-connected essential electronics.

      I still can do my scientific studies and research (the old way), can write books, design electronics circuits and even software (with the condition that it does not require me to be connected) even though I am not connected and that should earn me some money (my PhD field is computer science unfortunately).

      And yes, aircon was not even available a few decades ago and people could still live.

      I still should think about different aspects of it though.

    9. Re:holy shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a fundamental difference between photos and recordings that you choose to make, and photos and recordings that are made without your knowledge in a place which you think of as "private". The latter is what the GP would be preventing.

    10. Re:holy shit by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      But even the photos and videos you take deliberately can be used to gather intelligence from you and they may contain totally private information.

  8. i thought snowden.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    agreed to stop posting this stuff before putin would let him stay

    1. Re:i thought snowden.... by DrLang21 · · Score: 3, Informative

      He had already leaked it all to the Guardian. The information is out now. He just can't effectively comment on any of it anymore.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    2. Re:i thought snowden.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that was before Obama threatened to bomb the Russian port in Syria...

  9. Does it work? by NoKaOi · · Score: 2

    Budget documents say the $652 million project...

    Most big budget "defense" projects go over budget, over time, and don't perform to expectations. How well does this actually work (yeah, I know it's a rhetorical question)? Of course, by comparison, it's quite a bit less than the cost of a single B-2 bomber, so maybe its budget isn't large scale enough to underperform?

    1. Re:Does it work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They dont underperform , they are cash cows for the nsa, cia etc to siphon funds off for projects that are never subject to oversight

    2. Re:Does it work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is also a 50 billion "blank" budget, so if they are speaking the truth for once, the budget can be anywhere from $652 to $50653 million. It doesn't really matter anyway, money is just a number on a computer, so by now they should be able to create it out of thin air, even without a budget.

  10. adversaries such as Iran, Russia, China and North by oheso · · Score: 1

    Cold warriors haven't got the memo ...

  11. Conspiracy Theory: Network Neutrality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how they can afford all that bandwidth across the internet (sarcasm)...

  12. Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If Snowden leaked this at this point he's exposing information on operations, methods, everything.
    At what point does it cross the line and become treason? Is there a line which gets crossed where every Snowden supporter would say "this has gone too far"?

    1. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by oheso · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whistleblowing on a secret US government agency that's governed (if at all) by secret laws and secret courts, and is clearly out of control? Sorry, that would never cross the line into treason. It's the agency which is breaking the law.

    2. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by paenguin · · Score: 2

      Since the line for treason gets drawn by the government he is exposing, of course the answer is yes.

      The question is, does he care?

      --
      We should start referring to processes which run in the background by their correct technical name... paenguins.
    3. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Whistleblowing on a secret US government agency that's governed (if at all) by secret laws and secret courts, and is clearly out of control?

      Sorry, that would never cross the line into treason. It's the agency which is breaking the law.

      So if the identities of operatives were leaked, is that treason? What would be too far even for you?

    4. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LET ME FIRST STATE that whatever secret pacts with Satan that are absolutely vital for national security he exposes, it in no way diminishes the good that exposing our fledging autocratic police state's voyeur programs. That said, I'd say he crossed the line when he revealed that we hacked into China. Still, I'm receptive to whatever else he has on the NSA and other internal abuses that he may have. I'd wish he'd stop revealing foreign actions, if I can't pick and choose, I'd rather have both.

      Please, no replies from foreigners, especially Europeans. I have absolutely zero interest in anything you have to say about this. If you absolutely must, know that I'm going to stop reading the first time I see "Silly Americans!".

    5. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a non-american, I think Snowden went far enough for one man. I think we need other Snowdens to stand up and speak the truth. Treason against his government or all of humanity. Tough choice to make.

    6. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Since the line for treason gets drawn by the government he is exposing, of course the answer is yes.

      The question is, does he care?

      I'm asking what line do Snowden supporters draw. Or should Snowden have no limit to what he can leak?

    7. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by tragedy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What operatives? None of the people involved in this are working undercover, they're working in cubicles in office blocks in the US.

    8. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by bmo · · Score: 1

      The schedule for the Two Minute Hate has been adjusted to 13:00 Pacific Time.

      Snowden is the new Emmanuel Goldstein.

      --
      BMO

    9. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends, are you alarmed by the fact that the government has been taking over computers all over the world and using them in a way that gets normal people thrown in jail for multi-decade terms?

    10. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by hilather · · Score: 0

      Is there a line which gets crossed where every Snowden supporter would say "this has gone too far"?

      I have a better question, how much will it take for the American public finally do something about their government that is committed so many international crimes? For the record, I for one do not believe that shedding light criminal activities could ever go too far. What's the old phrase, "Don't shoot the messenger?"

    11. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is really, really easy to turn a blind eye to the evil one's government perpetrates when that evil is not directed at one's self or one's loved ones, and when in fact these benefit in some way from said evil.

      Does all this evil keep our economy strong (possibly at the expense of other economies)? Does it keep stuff cheap at walmart? Does it keep the movies and tv programs flowing? Does it keep most of us basically comfortable in our lives? Then maybe we just won't bother sticking our necks out for a bunch of foreigners who offer nothing to us in return.

    12. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At what point does it cross the line and become treason? When what he reports is deemed 'illegal'? oh, SNAP!

    13. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as he leaks real/true information then there is no fucking limit. It will just make him a bit more of the hero he already is.

    14. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is really, really easy to turn a blind eye to the evil one's government perpetrates when that evil is not directed at one's self or one's loved ones, and when in fact these benefit in some way from said evil.

      Does all this evil keep our economy strong (possibly at the expense of other economies)? Does it keep stuff cheap at walmart? Does it keep the movies and tv programs flowing? Does it keep most of us basically comfortable in our lives? Then maybe we just won't bother sticking our necks out for a bunch of foreigners who offer nothing to us in return.

      What is it that you want people to do exactly? Do you think we have any control over what intelligence agencies do? If we try to stop them then their allies will be in the position to do to us and our loved ones exactly what the US intelligence agencies are capable of doing to people in your country.

      You don't seem to understand how things work. The US citizen cannot stop the US government because your government would work with the FBI to stop that. It would be called terrorism. The penalty for terrorism is harsh and can even include death.

      If someone in your country tried to take on the intelligence agency of your country, then if your country is allied with the US government then the CIA would destroy those people/terrorists.

      The only realistic solutions which aren't suicide or completely insane all take time. Decades. The government agencies can be made less abusive over time, and made to follow the laws of war or at least make it clear to us what rules they follow.

    15. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      If Snowden leaked this at this point he's exposing information on operations, methods, everything.
      At what point does it cross the line and become treason? Is there a line which gets crossed where every Snowden supporter would say "this has gone too far"?

      No. Next question.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    16. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 1

      If Snowden leaked this at this point he's exposing information on operations, methods, everything.
      At what point does it cross the line and become treason? Is there a line which gets crossed where every Snowden supporter would say "this has gone too far"?

      No. Next question.

      Nice dodge to the question.

    17. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by c0lo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Snowden leaked this at this point he's exposing information on operations, methods, everything. At what point does it cross the line and become treason? Is there a line which gets crossed where every Snowden supporter would say "this has gone too far"?

      As a non-US citizen and potentially impacted by the US govt actions, I don't have any incentive to say "this has gone too far".

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    18. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let me be candid as a supporter.

      There was a point where I would have said "yes, it's gone too far".

      However, in response to revelations -- multiple agencies lied before congress, the american public, and the POTUS himself lied to the public.

      At this point, I can think of no action short of personally leading an army down Pennsylvania avenue that I would consider treasonous.

      The interests of the US Citizen are /no longer/ aligned with the interests of military and government policing and intelligence. That which hampers their ability to function can only immediately strengthen the peaceful citizenry.

      Sound radical? All they had to do was own up to democratic process.

    19. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by thoth · · Score: 0

      Sorry but this isn't whistleblowing - this is edging into sources and methods along the lines of what the Walker ring leaked.

    20. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      What operatives? None of the people involved in this are working undercover, they're working in cubicles in office blocks in the US.

      The people in Wall Street work in cubicles too. Nobody accused them of causing widespread destruction. In other news, the government would like to stop criminals from running botnets... because they hate competition.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    21. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So as long as the government puts someones life at risk with an "operation" or claims that it is at risk . . . then it doesn't matter that the "operation" is illegal, immoral and/or unethical and exposing the "operation" is treason?

      You can be manipulated trivially.

    22. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I'm asking what line do Snowden supporters draw. Or should Snowden have no limit to what he can leak?

      Direct observation of the posts in the Slashdot petri dish reveal that for many of them there is apparently no limit, regardless of the consequences.

      --
      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
    23. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by ljw1004 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It is NEVER treason to expose government wrongdoing or unconstitutional behavior. It is NEVER treason to expose government coverups or lies. It is NEVER treason to disclose programmes that should have had proper congressional or public oversight but didn't. Everything so far disclosed has fallen into the above categories. If ever disclosing one of these wrongdoings or unconstitutional behaviors or coverups has put an operative or operation in jeopardy - then the blame rests solely on the shoulders of whoever perpetrated that cover up. Otherwise, any wrongdoing could be hushed up simply by entangling it with something else.

      At least, that's my view as a Snowden and Manning supporter

    24. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm ambiguous about the leak of the black budget. Let's just say that although I didn't need to know this, I'm actually moderately reassured about it. NSA appears to be more interested in pwning the big fish, and less about going after the three-felonies-a-day committed by law abiding joe sipacks like you and me.

      But having said that, there were a few things in there, particularly regarding the choices imposed on the IC by the sequester, that I was genuinely surprised to see WaPo publish. I suppose our adversaries already know about those facts, or can trivially deduce them, so the harm is minimal, but it was still weird to see it stated so plainly.

      And having said that, I was just as bemused at the silliness of the choice of classification levels of a couple of paragraphs of PR fluff that, to me, seemed no more informative than the immediately-adjacent paragraph of PR fluff.

      The only conclusion I can reliably draw is that bureaucracy is a silly way to run a nation-state.

      Disclaimer: I don't have a clearance to jeopardize, and will neither confirm nor deny having read the damn thing. But if I were to read the damn thing, I'd be really pissed at WaPo not just linking to a damn static PDF and instead "embedding" it with some embedded viewer that uses a bunch of AJAX so WaPo (and anyone eavesdropping on WaPo) can get analytics of which IP addresses spent how many seconds reading each page.

    25. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a fledgling system, though. Back when telegrams were e-mail, we intercepted all telegrams: that was SHAMROCK. Other comms ran through MINARET. They were directed at US citizens by one or more WW2-outgrowth agencies that preceded the NSA.

      Telephone metadata monitoring? Not new. Wiretapping capabilities? Not new. Reading your e-mail did you really think that your Gmail, which Google was explicitly reading to adjust advertising to you, wasn't going to end up on the NSA's platter?

      Basically, what can potentially be monitored is and has been monitored, and we're still not living in 1984. Not even the French are terribly oppressed, and their version of the NSA doesn't have even the make-believe oversight that the NSA does.

    26. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by joe_frisch · · Score: 2

      As an american citizen it is not easy to figure out how to deal with this. Neither party is running on the "stop being evil" platform. Minor protests don't have much effect in this country and a revolution is clearly worse than what we have now.

    27. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by aNonnyMouseCowered · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or maybe you should be asking: should the government have no limit as to what it can do in the name of protecting the country from supposed foreign conspiracies.

    28. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by thoth · · Score: 1

      If so, where is the authorization of this activity by Congress, much less the American people?

      Authorization is in USC Title 50.

    29. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      I'm asking what line do Snowden supporters draw. Or should Snowden have no limit to what he can leak?

      Direct observation of the posts in the Slashdot petri dish reveal that for many of them there is apparently no limit, regardless of the consequences.

      Pray tell, following Snowden's leaks, what consequences (worse than what US is already doing) may there be for non-US internet users?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    30. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Historic information filling in the back story to this years cyber comments has consequences....
      http://blogs.fas.org/secrecy/2013/08/cyber-offense/
      “We believe our [cyber] offense is the best in the world,” - Gen. Keith B. Alexander, director of the National Security Agency and Commander of U.S. Cyber Command.
      Lets go down the list cold:
      A mission count, the citation needed for the aggressive aspect and the words GENIE and TURBINE.
      More people will understand terms like Tailored Access Operations (TAO).
      More firms will be careful about their shopping for routers, switches and firewalls from US product lines. That would be nothing new after 30 years of crypto warnings of useless hardware and software been sold world wide from 'trusted' brands.
      The harvest aspect is fun ins scope and costing, how is the US getting all that data back without skilled admins at some point working out what their expensive systems are doing :)
      The use of sites more within to the US (Georgia, Texas, Colorado) may point to more domestic operations - also not really new.
      Overlapping missions notes will be very interesting to US legal teams and law reform groups.
      So over all a few new names, terms and a hint that some hardware and software encryption is mostly expensive junk- something books and magazines noted many years ago.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    31. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      David Miranda, Glen Greenwald's lover, had a list of British agents under Non Official Cover obtained from Snowden, along with about 58,000 other documents, when he was detained by British police. The lives of all of those agents is deemed at risk, and their status gives them no protection. The British assess those documents as being compromised.

      Snowden's leaks are a disaster for US, British, and who knows what other intelligence agencies.

      --
      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
    32. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At what point do you realize you are a troll? When you used "every", you answered your own question... which is that there is no line. The world is filled with an amazing mix of people and we draw strength from that in a democracy but that also means there are people whose beliefs mean they have no limits. Pro Lifers who murder abortion providers, corporations who bribe politicians to remove restrictions on their behavior aka campaign contributions and state security types who will trample every last civil liberty in their impossible quest to "keep us safe".

      So what if Snowden has exposed "operations", "methods", "everything"? In an open government, such as a democracy, secrets are only temporary. They all come out eventually. Any government that does not plan for the dirty laundry to come out is short sighted or incompetent. By the way, I've seen nothing released so far is anything that hasn't been widely speculated about.

      Finally, Let me propose a better question: have you asked your congressperson at what line the government has gone too far? See it cuts both ways in a real democracy. But the whole point of government by the people is that the people will push back so government doesn't get out of hand.

    33. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Well put, although with what the British found in David Miranda's data, it isn't edging. It is somewhere between a swan dive and a cliff dive. This is way more damaging than most people realize. The British found 58,000 of their documents alone that he was transporting. A former Eastern Block intelligence general office assess Snowden as being a Russian asset.

      Defector Describes Russia’s Handling of NSA Leaker Snowden

      He explained, “During the Cold War there were hundreds of other self-motivated defectors from the Soviet bloc, and as far as I know, none came out loaded with secret documents. Even the famous KGB archivist Col. Vasili Mitrokhin, who in the 1990s supplied us with some 25,000 pages of highly confidential documents (described by the FBI as ‘the most complete and extensive intelligence ever received from any source’) did not dare to cross the border with documents concealed on him. The British MI6 smuggled them out of Russia.”

      Snowden, by contrast, was gathering up classified documents for months, including information disclosed by The Washington Post in its Friday newspaper of the “black budget” of U.S. intelligence agencies. The material was “obtained by The Washington Post from former—intelligence contractor Edward Snowden,” the paper confirmed. This is just the latest disclosure by Snowden, and more have been promised.

      --
      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
    34. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Sabriel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's seriously a good question. The ironic answer is that the knowledge that would be sufficient to make an informed decision (as to where the line should be other than an annoyingly vague "whatever doesn't make it worse for humanity") is being withheld from us. Any actual example we could use would be based on what we already know, which isn't going to be whatever the government is still keeping secret - the good _and_ the bad.

      Which puts us all between something of a rock and a hard place.

      Having read this particular article, it doesn't mention any specific operations, nor any specific methods. I say "specific" because, while it does reveal that the US government is exploiting vulnerabilities in software and hardware (really not a surprise), it does not reveal specifics that would allow an enemy to distinguish between "US government exploit" and "random joe exploit".

      I also found this part interesting: "The NSA designs most of its own implants, but it devoted $25.1 million this year to “additional covert purchases of software vulnerabilities” from private malware vendors, a growing gray-market industry based largely in Europe." Apparently, providing 25.1 million dollars of additional demand for unethical behaviour is now within the NSA's newest line in the sand, to go along with global warrant-less electronic surveillance of everyone including its own citizens within its own borders.

      Which means here's the thing:

      The US government crossed its constitutional line under a veil of secrecy from its own people and then said: I'll keep going.
      Edward Snowden crossed his personal line under the orders of the US government and then said: I'm turning whistleblower.

      So right now, I'm a lot more worried about the US government's limits than Snowden's.

    35. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Cite the authorization for breaking into other countries' systems, installing back doors, destroying their data, and implanting malware.

      This kind of handwaving apologetics makes you as guilty as the rest.

    36. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Snowden's leaks are a disaster for US, British, and who knows what other intelligence agencies.

      I was expecting a statement of something negative occurring to buttress your argument, but mysteriously there's only this very positive outcome notes.

      Can you add whatever is missing to your post? I'm confused.

    37. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good.

    38. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 2

      that's a rather absolutist perspective. isn't it possible that whistleblowing on a super sensitive program is both necessary and treasonous?

      and that if found treasonous, a due process trial should happen?

      and that the president could pardon the convict once the impact if that revelation is clear?

      not saying that will apply, but it is far closer to reality than "all whistleblowing automatically erases harm from completely unrelated organizations and people", which is how your comment reads.

      we are getting summarized information. keep in mind that the actual documents that the guardian and now Der Spiegel have likely contain a lot more detail. I'm betting It's well past treason already

    39. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's fledging in the sense that this can barely be called the beginning of how powerful the "security" apparatus will be if things don't change.

    40. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

      Maybe this will help. Since US and British intelligence agencies have helped to stop terrorist plots around the world in many countries, their disruption may lead to attacks in your country, the deaths of people you hold dear, and destruction of things you treasure.

      I wouldn't get too comfortable with the current state of affairs. It hasn't been that long since Snowden began his disclosures, and some problems, such as Islamist terrorism, are not likely to go away any time soon. In fact it is likely to grow much worse in Europe in the coming decades. That same could easily be true in the Pacific regions as well.

      Maybe you'll never truly understand until you hear a blast yourself. Some people just never learn.

      --
      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
    41. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Snowden's leaks are a disaster for US, British, and who knows what other intelligence agencies.

      Absolutely not true. It's a great opportunity to clean house, so to speak. 'Nonproductive' personnel will be thrown under the bus, and the agencies will be getting much bigger budgets, to... uh.. 'rebuild'.. yeah, that's it. To me, this whole affair is brilliant. You know, shake the trees occasionally.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    42. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry sweetie, the life they can't save now could be yours.

    43. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by FuzzNugget · · Score: 1

      Da fuck are you smoking and can I have some? Because, damn, that must be some strong shit.

      The NSA already crossed that line into treason by violating the most fundamental and sacred legal document in the land. Is it treason to expose treason? Only when they have changed the definition of treason to be any actions or speech against what they're doing, which, as evidenced in the past several weeks, is, "whatever the fuck we want."

    44. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lives of agents are at risk? How? By being named? Look, the government has no business doing this in the first place. It is the government that has done any kind of endangerment if there is any such at all.

      Bullshit argument.

    45. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by lennier1 · · Score: 2

      The lives of all of those agents is deemed at risk, and their status gives them no protection.

      If you work for something that has turned into criminal organizations of the worst kind (e.g., endangering infrastructure components of other countries), you deserve what's coming your way.

    46. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since US and British intelligence agencies have helped to stop terrorist plots around the world in many countries, their disruption may lead to attacks in your country, the deaths of people you hold dear, and destruction of things you treasure.

      No, it is vastly more likely that activities precisely like this will cause the deaths of myself and mine. There's a very simple rule to reality--fuck with people, they will inevitably fuck with you back. The best course of action to avert that is to avoid, or minimize, fucking with them in the first place.

      I suppose you're among those that think 9/11 happened because Islamic countries just decided they "hate our freedom", rather than a long history of being fucked with in a manner that pre-existed that event and continues through today, and will inevitably result in further animosity and eventual blowback.

      But, that's a case, clearly, of American agencies -failure-, not success. So, to give me some evidence whatsoever that the billions of NSA dollars spent on these actions, ensuring that billions more will have to spent dealing with the animosity they themselves engender, can you give me a single example where a "terrorist act" has -clearly and crucially- been averted by the types of activities outlined in TFA?

      We have children in a clubhouse that pays them well and allows them to play with big, expensive toys while fucking with people. They tell themselves whatever rationalization is necessary to sleep at night, naturally. However, the more that is revealed the more paper-thin that rationalization grows, and, come on, you seriously aren't at the point where you can barely hold a straight face without bursting out laughing yourself, at your own claims? You must be in deep, or well-compensated indeed.

    47. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Error27 · · Score: 1

      Snowden's insurance file probably contains actual backdoor information, SSL keys, and millions of collected passwords. The internet would have to shut down for weeks... I think even staunch Snowden supporters would be annoyed.

      But Snowden would be dead at that point so he wouldn't care.

    48. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." -- H. L. Mencken

      I suppose that can apply to allies and others that US and British intelligence helps to protect as well. Cripple them at your own risk.

      --
      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
    49. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Don't worry sweetie, the life they can't save now could be yours.

      I feel a bit freer because of that, you know? Honey... I know, it may sound weird to you, but... I don't crave to be saved by the government spooks, thank you.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    50. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That depends of if we decide the NSA has gone far enough to be considered a domestic enemy of the people. It lies to congress, it lies to the citizens, and it may be lying to the president as well. That doesn't sound much like a legit government agency. It spies on Americans and subverts the Constitution. That sounds like something an enemy does.

    51. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there a line which gets crossed where every Snowden supporter would say "this has gone too far"?

      <<For GENIE’s next phase, according to an authoritative reference document, the NSA has brought online an automated system, code-named TURBINE, that is capable of managing “potentially millions of implants” for intelligence gathering “and active attack.”
      [...]
      Most GENIE operations aim for “exploitation” of foreign systems, a term defined in the intelligence budget summary as “surreptitious virtual or physical access to create and sustain a presence inside targeted systems or facilities.” The document adds: “System logs and processes are modified to cloak the intrusion, facilitate future access, and accomplish other operational goals.”

      The NSA designs most of its own implants, but it devoted $25.1 million this year to “additional covert purchases of software vulnerabilities” from private malware vendors, a growing gray-market industry based largely in Europe.>>

      Your government is running automated network scanners and compromising millions of machines using blackhat exploits sold by eastern European criminals. At what point it NSA becomes just another branch of the Russian mafia ? At what point should the world simply disconnect US altogether from the global internet ?

    52. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

      I suppose you're among those that think 9/11 happened because Islamic countries just decided they "hate our freedom", rather than a long history of being fucked with in a manner that pre-existed that event and continues through today, and will inevitably result in further animosity and eventual blowback.

      Here we come to the heart of the issue - you fundamentally fail to understand al Qaida's motivation. Al Qaida wants to continue the Muslim conquests of centuries ago, when invading Muslim armies threatened to conquer Europe, and continue on to the rest of the world. They want to restore what they see as the glory of Islam. They want to restore the Islamic caliphate government dissolved in 1923 with the fall of the Ottoman Empire. They want replace existing government in Muslim countries with strict Islamic governments ruling according to their interpretation of Islamic law. They want to reclaim former Muslim lands, such as Spain, by reconquest. They want to expand the new Islamic empire to all nations, and convert all people to Islam. They are militant and imperialistic.

      Do you know what Bin Laden's demands were to the US after 9/11? Convert to Islam, and replace the Constitution with Islamic Sharia law.

      They understand this is a long term struggle. They are patient, and will continue it. The problem is likely to get worse before it gets better. Countries facing the threat they pose ignore it to their peril.

      Since you are likening intelligence agencies to "children in a clubhouse," that "allows them to play with big, expensive toys," I'm not sure you are really engaging on this at a serious level.
       

      --
      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
    53. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry sweetie, the life they can't save now could be yours.

      And the life they can't spy upon and control anymore could also be mine. Given there's very little evidence of actual lives saved and major attacks foiled, I'll stick with the later, thank you.

    54. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well one of the problems is that the damage that these agencies are doing is so much more obvious than what they "help protect". Do you have anything to back up your claim that these machinations have foiled attacks on allies?

    55. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you think they would bother to listen to you? (Assuming that you are even recorded.) Are you involved in that many dodgy things?

    56. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      I suppose you're among those that think 9/11 happened because Islamic countries just decided they "hate our freedom", rather than a long history of being fucked with in a manner that pre-existed that event and continues through today, and will inevitably result in further animosity and eventual blowback.

      Here we come to the heart of the issue - you fundamentally fail to understand al Qaida's motivation. Al Qaida wants to continue the Muslim conquests of centuries ago, when invading Muslim armies threatened to conquer Europe, and continue on to the rest of the world. They want to restore what they see as the glory of Islam. They want to restore the Islamic caliphate government dissolved in 1923 with the fall of the Ottoman Empire. They want replace existing government in Muslim countries with strict Islamic governments ruling according to their interpretation of Islamic law. They want to reclaim former Muslim lands, such as Spain, by reconquest. They want to expand the new Islamic empire to all nations, and convert all people to Islam. They are militant and imperialistic.

      Do you know what Bin Laden's demands were to the US after 9/11? Convert to Islam, and replace the Constitution with Islamic Sharia law.

      [Citation needed] (apropos dose sizes).

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    57. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Referencing other children in their clubhouse doesn't dissuade me from my conclusion regarding ours.

      Al Qaida has no possibility whatsoever of reaching these grand visions of world conquest--and they know it. They are playing for local popularity and the corresponding political perks in the same manner as our politicians do when making grand, sweeping proclamations about the True Evil Of Those Other Guys.

      We have a constitution. It makes implementation of Sharia law impossible via anything less than violent overthrow of our country, its military, its government, its unaccepting citizens, and its constitution--a task that right now is far more likely to happen at the hands of the NSA than Al Qaida cells. There is no Western country that will allow any such thing to come to pass. The population alone will not allow it. For the United States, nothing more is needed than simple maintenance of our territory via out military even circa 1950 to make such an occurrence a completely impossible fantasy.

      Selling that fantasy, however, has allowed a military-bureaucratic structure to form using it as an ongoing excuse, that continually, and in an ever-increasing fashion, drains our citizenry economically and places them at ever-greater risk from retaliation from those we target. This is the actual, real-world, problem that we face with the NSA. Al Qaida is nothing more in this equation than something to add as an addendum to the "because terrorism" line for the next round of enormous budget allocations.

    58. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by erikkemperman · · Score: 2

      What was found on Miranda was raw intel -- before being edited. Nothing that made it to press, as far as I know, has identified individuals. Also, how is it Snowden's responsibility that these "non official cover" agents enjoy no protection based on that status?

      Finally, can I safely assume that you were vehemently opposed to the pardon of Scooter Libby (and by implication Dick Cheney) for outing an agent -- rather than hang for treason? Which was arguably the more reprehensible in that that leak did not purport to do any public service, but was only out of petty spite (and discouraging dissent) because Wilson wasn't playing along with the massive deception leading up to the illegal war in Iraq?

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    59. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

      The Future of Terrorism: What al-Qaida Really Wants

      Full text: bin Laden's 'letter to America'

      Q2) As for the second question that we want to answer: What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

      (1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam. ...

      (2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

      (a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest.

      We call you to all of this that you may be freed from that which you have become caught up in; that you may be freed from the deceptive lies that you are a great nation, that your leaders spread amongst you to conceal from you the despicable state to which you have reached.

      (b) It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind:

      (i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator....

      HAMAS Targets Spain

      Bonus:
      UK: Muslim Gangs Enforce Sharia Law in London
      AU: Muslim body wants 'moderate' sharia law but government rejects plan
      SE: 'Separate laws for Muslims' idea slammed

      --
      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
    60. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by c0lo · · Score: 1

      thanks.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    61. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Happy to oblige. Enjoy.

      --
      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
    62. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

      Is leaking the identities of operatives levying War? No. Is giving identities of operatives in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort? Yes. Does that automatically make one who gives out the identities of operatives a person adhering to the US's enemies? No, or the US government itself would be guilty of treason every time any member of it's own secret branches worked with members of another country's secret service branch in an identifiable way--the very scenario that the leaked NSA/GCHQ spying cooperation would likely entail.

      Seriously, you seem to be entirely ignore the "in adhering to their Enemies". It's not enough that information could Aid or Comfort an enemy. It has to be an intentional act to aid an Enemy. To that end, whistleblowing is by its very definition about exposing an organization's misdeeds for the health of the organization. That is, in its own way, a means to help the organization. That's the very opposite of any sort of treason.

      Snowden and others may be guilty of espionage (which conveniently NSA seems to have gained license to do without any real regulation), but that doesn't make him or others guilty of treason. Having said that, I don't think the NSA is guilty of treason either. That doesn't mean they aren't guilty of breaking other laws, though.

    63. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That depends of if we decide the NSA has gone far enough to be considered a domestic enemy of the people. It lies to congress, it lies to the citizens, and it may be lying to the president as well. That doesn't sound much like a legit government agency. It spies on Americans and subverts the Constitution. That sounds like something an enemy does.

      Ah, but we don't pay the enemy. There's the difference. Except that pretty much any sworn enemy of the U.S.A. was at one point of time funded or trained by the CIA.

    64. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Original acts are criminal, all agents involved are to be summarily extraditable criminals (Ref. Gary McKeanon), so exposing them can never be treason in my book, and quite possibly in the book of anyone who thinks the country is of the people and the government is subordinate to the people, we the people!

    65. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... had a list of British agents ...

      I've not seen that. Link?

    66. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. At what point does a police informer "go too far" in exposing the crimes of the gang down the street? The question doesn't make sense, unless you are in the gang.

    67. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2

      Obvious solution: vote for a party that you don't find evil. They don't have to win. If 10% of people voted green and 10% voted libertarian, and the apparent reason was surveillance programs... then democrats and republicans in congress would change their tune in a hurry because picking up those votes would be enough to swing almost every incumbent from a possible loss to a sure win in their next election.

      Also, if your congressional representative of either major party happens to be anti-evil -- and there are some -- be sure to cross party lines to vote for them.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    68. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If my server is compromised, I'd like to know about it. Releasing such information would only be a service to the free world, even if it wouldn't be a service to the US.

    69. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by sjames · · Score: 1

      The fact that the enemy has infiltrated deeply enough to siphon tax money for their nefarious purposes just makes it worse.

    70. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes two expensive contractors to replace one at the hardware level. Expensive contractors to ride around the USA looking into the past of each and every contractor for real this time.
      Personnel who recall past errors/waste and that have the rank/personality to express issues with outside spending and political connections will go.
      Expansion in the USA, expect to see the expensive testing of experimental AI and robotic maintenance systems too.
      New testing of staff via expensive new experts, profiles created, watching staff internet logs, travel, life, spending habits, non fiction reading.
      More trusted foreign linguists and the faith/political issues they bring via their "real" home countries and true loyalties.
      The people left will be 'new' and learning, foreign or just know how/when to say yes, dreaming of becoming a contractor real soon.
      This is not a disaster, its a generational spending spree.
      As for the US and UK intelligence agencies - would they really have lists of their agents in any useful form?
      The US and UK have obtained many countries spy lists and know never create their own "walk out" lists.
      The Russians would be all over any US personal with that kind of access and the US/UK know that from past efforts.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    71. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      That's not the point he's making. Sure, this particular operation has no undercover operatives, but what if he had leaked information with such individuals? Would it go too far then?

    72. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The "list of British agents" seems to be all over as a new talking point.
      Why would any modern agency would do a 1980's Stasi and make a digital master list?
      Considering the CIA got the East German spy list intact.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    73. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you think they would bother to listen to you? Are you involved in that many dodgy things?

      You sir, are a royal idiot. "Controlling my life" does not entail listening to my boring chats and lackluster sex life. It has more to do with silencing and intimidating other people who are in the position to change the world for the better. These people are rare and vulnerable and without them to inform and lead, the public at large is just a bunch of scared sheep, you and myself included.

      Pervasive surveillance means any revolt is nipped in the bud and the giant boot can stamp humanity's face for a thousand years and you will welcome it and consider it necessary to protect against the evil eurasian terrorists.

      Nevemind that equating "anything that the government might find offensive or interesting" with "dodgy" is a sign of moral infantilism and inability to distinguish real life nuances.

    74. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Do you know what Bin Laden's demands were to the US after 9/11?

      To get the fuck out of Saudi Arabia. That was his whole beef with us. Period. His aim was not world conquest as you warmongers always like to believe.

      They understand this is a long term struggle. They are patient, and will continue it. The problem is likely to get worse before it gets better.

      How surprised would you be to discover that your real enemy was not Al Qaeda at all, but your own fellow citizens? The ones who believe in freedom and will resist people like you and your police state policies. People who will fight you in the streets for their freedom if necessary. The misconception is that it takes a majority of the population to revolt. It doesn't. It just takes enough to give the armed forces a good fight.

      Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson recieved 1.2 million votes in the last presidential election. A full 1% of the total votes. If every one of those 1.2 million people learned how to shoot and bought themselves some decent weapons and body armor and if the techies among us spent years or decades working on Big Dog esque combat robots to enhance our numbers I think we could give you fascist fucks a decent fight. Especially since it would be all guerrila warfare just like in the war of independence.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    75. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The lives of all of those agents is deemed at risk, and their status gives them no protection. The British assess those documents as being compromised.

      Of course they do, otherwise they would have detained him for no reason. Their assumption is that the agents would be at risk if the documents were released, but so far the Guardian has been very careful to redact or not publish anything that could pose danger.

      Besides which, arguing that agents of a criminal organization could be at risk if their criminal activity is exposed isn't much of an argument.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    76. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/02/05/binladen.transcript/

      Q: Let's get back to what happened in New York and Washington. What is your assessment of the attacks on America? What's their effect on America and the Muslim world?

      BIN LADEN: The events of Tuesday, September the 11th, in New York and Washington are great on all levels. Their repercussions are not over. Although the collapse of the twin towers is huge, but the events that followed, and I'm not just talking about the economic repercussions, those are continuing, the events that followed are dangerous and more enormous than the collapse of the towers.

      The values of this Western civilization under the leadership of America have been destroyed. Those awesome symbolic towers that speak of liberty, human rights, and humanity have been destroyed. They have gone up in smoke.

      ...

      I tell you freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people and the West in general will enter an unbearable hell and a choking life

      If you read the whole interview you see that he does briefly mention his earlier demands that the US leave Saudi Arabia, but in this interview he focuses more on Palestine and the death of Muslims from American bombs. He mentions many times that 9/11 was justified as payback for American wars in Muslim countries. Nowhere does he mention annexing North America and imposing Muslim law which would be a ludicrous goal in any case. If that was so important to him I wonder why he left it out in such a high profile interview with Al Jazeera.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    77. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      As a Libertarian like Snowden, I support transparency up to the point of causing specific harm to innocent individuals. If the NYT or Washington Post actually release information that results in anyone being killed or imprisoned by plausible enemies (not by say Canada) that's where I would draw the line. Specific details about military or valid intelligence operations that would be genuinely useful and non-obvious to plausible future enemies may also be crossing the line. For anything else I say bring it on! That information wants to be free. Just saying that the US engages in cyber attacks against certain countries or even mentioning how many such attacks we typically engage in in a year is anything but harmful to Americans and the rest of the world. Mainly because of the hypocrisy. I believe hypocrisy should always be exposed. In order to correct an out of control government the people have to know what is going on.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    78. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by lennier1 · · Score: 1

      It seems more and more like they're using "copyright math" to justify the tools for a police state with the untold trillions of deaths they have already avoided.

    79. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Snowden leaked this at this point he's exposing information on operations, methods, everything.
      At what point does it cross the line and become treason?

      You need to clarify your question: treason against the United States of America, or treason against its government? Those items have become quite different.

    80. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid troll.

      The NSA illegally put those operatives lives in danger by deploying them without having any power to do so.

      Pointing out this illegal crime is not the source of the crime, the crime is!

      If you murder someone, you don't get to claim the person that turned you in is guilty of ruining your life, only you are.

    81. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is NEVER treason to expose government wrongdoing or unconstitutional behavior. It is NEVER treason to expose government coverups or lies. It is NEVER treason to disclose programmes that should have had proper congressional or public oversight but didn't. Everything so far disclosed has fallen into the above categories. If ever disclosing one of these wrongdoings or unconstitutional behaviors or coverups has put an operative or operation in jeopardy - then the blame rests solely on the shoulders of whoever perpetrated that cover up. Otherwise, any wrongdoing could be hushed up simply by entangling it with something else.

      Your statement assumes that any of the reported behavior is unconstitutional as interterpreted by the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of our government. What if our representatives all thought the behavior you've decided was unconstituional is A-OK and granted their approval?

      The majority of your co-citizens voted for our consitutionally elected representatives. If our representatives are fucking us and we are unhappy with the outcome, it is our responsibility to vote them out and replace them with a crew that behaves as the majority expects. Sadly, the majority appears to be pre-occupied with gay marriage, abortion, LILO, America's Got Talent, UFC, NASCAR and/or is cognitively impaired by poverty. Until that changes I got nothing, but I don't absolutely equate the reported behaviors as a clear constitutional violation without details of intent and implementation. The potential for abuse of collected information in an unconstitutional manner appears to be there, but I've yet to see compelling evidence that the information was ever used for other than intended purposes.

    82. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I may have more to say at a later time, but the short answer for now is look at the date of the interview: October 2001. The Taliban had been pressuring Bin Laden to deny any involvement to try to forestall or limit any American military action against Afghanistan. Bin Laden still made his demands to the US clear some time later, but still didn't fully and openly admit al Qaida's role in the 9/11 attacks for some time after that.

      It is nonsense to try to claim that Bin Laden's direct demands that dovetail with al Qaida's overall goal don't apply because he doesn't explicitly state them in every interview.

      I notice that you only seem to quote Bin Laden at the points where he agrees with your apparent belief that the American government is the big enemy but leave out where he states they have taken the battle to inside America, will continue it, and find it permissible to kill innocents.

      I don't think that the collapse of the World Trade Center from the attacks in New York, crushing thousands of people to death, resulted in the "Tree of Liberty" growing any stronger from the blood shed. Do you? Do you think they were just not "patriotic enough" to make a difference?

      Al Qaida is fighting the long fight. Europe is already in trouble. The birth rate of native Europeans in plunging far below replacement level in most countries. They are making up the difference with immigrants that are not assimilating, and which reject European values. The problem is likely to grow much worse as they start to have children since many of them are being radicalized in Europe. How well do you think that will turn out in the long run? Europe may very well be in a civil war in 50 years.

      --
      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
    83. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cry me a fucking river, Mr Donovan. YOU created and still protect this menace by not touching the Saudi tyranny.

      Rational would be to nuke Mekka and display these nastyballs what their nasty, women-enslaving/killing "god" is worth. But what do you do ? You destabilize Iraq and hang Saddam. A potential ally of one of the most nasty ideologies the world has ever bred: Strictly interpreted Islam.

      And please, Mr Murkin, don't tell me "it is just a religion".

    84. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      It's 2013 A., handwriting is illegible and filing physical paper is staff intensive, typewriters are hard to find, and computers are all the rage. ;)

      Regular news sources have carried the story about the list of agents.

      --
      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
    85. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is indeed a realistic long-term threat of being outbred by muslim immigrants who will inevitably demand Sharia to be implemented. In Europe and the US. We have already succumbed to destructive Sodom-and-Gomorra ideologies of sexual malpractice and drug abuse, if we are truthful to ourselves.

      But yeah, the rational fix is to implement travel controls and immigration embargoes against these medievalists, not trying to locate a bolted horse with the "NSA magic". But that in turn would run against massive economic interests and the corruption emerging from NY and Hollywood.

    86. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      list of agents ... Do you really think any agency with access to the combined history and generational operational knowledge of the CIA/NSA/GCHQ/MI5/6 would make a usable, easy, master list of active agents?
      The Russians would find it exists via their many skilled helpers and act on that list in some dramatic long term or short term way.
      Overtime the CIA/MI6 would correctly wonder where their useful/top agents went and call in experts to find the problem - ie no simple 'digital' master list like that would last very long.
      Why was East Germany so sure a computer list was a really bad idea? They had lost a paper list of their spies in the West too.
      It was seen as a stupid idea at the time, warned against and the list was lost to the CIA.
      Thats two hints from easy spy history not to make the big paper chart or digital list of active spies.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    87. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those that are not Arab, cannot be/become Muslim.
      And goy cannot be/become Jewish.

    88. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Office of The President has subverted the Constitution long before.

    89. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are an American, to do this is your Constitutional duty.

    90. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah, an intel mud-slinging fest. We surely have to believe our spooks and the defectors they have acquired. Wake me up when you have something substantial.

      As a matter of fact, Russia has been voluntarily giving up enormous portions of land, while America got more and more control during the last 20 years. By military force. Who is the villian again.

      Vladimir Putin is a true Patriot and much more than an Ex-KGB man. A patriot who saved his country from being enslaved by Anglosaxon and Zionist financial interest. You Anglos and Zionists would want Russians down at the floor like the Africans you have semi-colonised these days.

      I am not a Russian and neither do I gain from saying the truth. I am just a German with more than two working brain cells. An as General Patton said, Germans have the strange habit of saying the truth.

    91. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About a billion non-Arab Muslims disagree with you.

      Conversion to Judaism is possible as well, besides which Christians are theologically considered to be grafted onto the tree of Abraham.

    92. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by joe_frisch · · Score: 1

      Not easy to find a party that that I agree with. Also it often possible for a 3rd party candidate to act as a "spoiler", decreasing the chances of the main party candidate with the most similar agenda and helping the candidate with the views with which you most strongly disagree.

    93. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by chihowa · · Score: 1

      And yet you start this thread by implying that even letting the people know of the extent of the abuse is treason. How well do any of your solutions to make the agencies less abusive over time work if the abuse itself is kept secret from the people that are supposed to be motivating the change?

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    94. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      None of the people involved in this are working undercover, they're working in cubicles in office blocks in the US.

      That is a really scary thought.

      So all these people who are accepting money to do black hat programming that most others would consider dirty work-- or even evil-- are out and about, mixing with the common folk. Available for contacting by agents of the Syrian Electronic Army, the Mexican drug cartels, other potential buyers of the kind of stuff these guys can carry around on a thumb drive. And these NSA employees have already demonstrated that their moral fiber is flexible when it comes to money and how the software they produce is used.

      But I expect that the NSA keeps these guys on a leash. There are probably other NSA employees whose skills are in surreptitiously following these guys around to keep them out of trouble. There are probably NSA employees whose skills are in pole dancing and keeping a guy interested so he does not rub up against some gal with other allegiances.

      The NSA is a dirty little vipers nest. It has no place in the USA; its very existence is a violation of the USA Constitution.

      --
      Will
    95. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      The REAL question does not concern Snowden and what he has leaked publicly.

      The real question is how many others at the NSA have been selling stuff on thumb drives to agents of other countries, the Syrian Electronic Army, and the Colombian drug cartel?

      The NSA is incapable of securing the data it collects and the black hat software it produces. It seems to believe that since the Lockheed Skunkworks program was so successful in the 1950s through the 1970s, the same techniques can be used in today's cyber world. What is wrong with that picture? A big part of it is that you cannot smuggle an SR71 Blackbird out of the Skunkworks on a thumb drive.

      Assholes in the upper reaches of the USA government have created a nest of vipers that cannot be contained and whose venomous stings are going to repeatedly damage USA corporations and institutions. The NSA is by its very nature a crime against the USA Constitution. It is like a hand grenade factory where the stuff that comes off the assembly line will go to USA armories, but all the hundreds of assembly line workers can help themselves to as many grenades as they can carry, as often as they want. And who they sell those to, and where they end up being used, is of little concern to the NSA.

      --
      Will
    96. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At what point does it cross the line and become treason?

      The point at which my dick slides into your wife and she moans with pleasure.

    97. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry sweetie, the life they can't save now could be yours.

      You are the kind of low quality human being who lives in fear.

      Not all of us do.

    98. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sucks that the NSA is making you work on a holiday weekend.

      Of course, Maryland being the shithole that it is, a holiday is a cruel
      joke, so perhaps you are best off spewing propaganda on Slashdot.

      Maybe some day you will be given a field assignment and you can
      show them your true value.

    99. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if the identities of operatives were leaked, is that treason? What would be too far even for you?

      Spying on your own population. That is treason and too far even for me.

    100. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Omestes · · Score: 1

      When actions are secret from voters, democracy completely breaks down. How could I make an informed decision based on the actions of the NSA and secrect courts, when I'm not allowed to know about these things? How can I vote on information I'm not permitted to have?

      Yes, the usual answer is "Trust us, we're the government", but I'm not even allowed to have enough information to assess this claim. Is the government trustworthy, how the hell should I know. Are they abusing their power, I'm not allowed the tools to assess this either, outside of their say so. Which turns this whole thing into a tautology; I should trust the government because it claims to be trustworthy, and I should trust this claim because the government is trustworthy.

      People like Snowden and Manning are the only means I have to be an informed voter. Which is a sad state of affairs, I'm forced to trust these people, acting out of who-knows-what motivations, over my own elected officials.

      But then again, this all very naive on my part. Manning didn't matter, things didn't change, why would Snowden make a difference? My government will never change, until the day that it finally, after a slow decline, collapses into irrelevancy dragging the rest of the US with it. But I take some hope that someday, when I'm long dead, the US be the topic of historians who might have a better picture than we will ever be permitted to have. Then, and only then, may we be judged on our merits (and it probably won't be as flattering as we fool ourselves into thinking).

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    101. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Oh they can cause plenty of destruction, but they're not undercover operatives who are in danger if their cover is blown.

    102. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 1

      And yet you start this thread by implying that even letting the people know of the extent of the abuse is treason. How well do any of your solutions to make the agencies less abusive over time work if the abuse itself is kept secret from the people that are supposed to be motivating the change?

      I didn't imply, I asked a question. Where should we draw the line? Should the concept of treason even exist?

    103. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When there are multiple gangs, with a delicate balance between them... And some gangs are much worse than the others. Then when the informer gives out information which gives the other gangs an advantage.

    104. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 1

      The lives of all of those agents is deemed at risk, and their status gives them no protection.

      If you work for something that has turned into criminal organizations of the worst kind (e.g., endangering infrastructure components of other countries), you deserve what's coming your way.

      How would they know what they are working for? Can we apply this to tax payers as well?

    105. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 1

      The lives of all of those agents is deemed at risk, and their status gives them no protection. The British assess those documents as being compromised.

      Of course they do, otherwise they would have detained him for no reason. Their assumption is that the agents would be at risk if the documents were released, but so far the Guardian has been very careful to redact or not publish anything that could pose danger.

      Besides which, arguing that agents of a criminal organization could be at risk if their criminal activity is exposed isn't much of an argument.

      You assume the agents of the organization know it's criminal?

    106. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 1

      That depends of if we decide the NSA has gone far enough to be considered a domestic enemy of the people. It lies to congress, it lies to the citizens, and it may be lying to the president as well. That doesn't sound much like a legit government agency. It spies on Americans and subverts the Constitution. That sounds like something an enemy does.

      That doesn't mean everyone within or associated with the organization had anything to do with that. They might not know any more than they were told.

    107. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I may have more to say at a later time..."
      no doubt.

    108. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It crosses the line into treason when he exposes something that should be secret that is NOT already illegal/unconstitutional in the US, he has yet to do that.

      Everything he has leaked is stuff that shouldn't be secret because it shouldn't have happened to begin with as it IS illegal/unconstitutional here as well.

      Here is an example:
      Leaking out company secrets on manufacturing techniques and technology you were promised to keep secret is crossing the line.
      Leaking out company secrets that they planned on killing the leaders of a rival company or framing him for rape is not.

    109. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by riondluz · · Score: 1

      Well said and concur; but:

      "Any government that does not plan for the dirty laundry to come out is short sighted or incompetent."

      I would have thought so as well, until I realized that "higher" doesn't run on logic, trusting P.R. meisters and lawyers to provide opportunity in the face of any and all positive or negative outcomes.

      The network of insiders w/in insiders w/in the privilidged w/in elites.
      They're a steamroller and they only need press on, lying and cheating whenever called for. An auto analogy would be a too big, too powerful, forward only (RWD) gas-guzzler with lousy brake system. The American SUV, a GMAC love story.
      It's a 'hummer' and the only line is the red one.

      --
      resist propaganda
    110. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by sjames · · Score: 1

      I never claimed otherwise. But it would make Snowden a patriot for exposing the wolf in the fold.

    111. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      Those documents were compromised - by the NSA. I understand if you disagree, but I'm willing to give everyone the benefit of the doubt here and assume that Snowden didn't share the list with anyone else and The Guardian wasn't going to publish it. That means that in practical terms the British agents aren't actually at risk, and wouldn't have been at risk, although I certainly understand why the British government believes they are, and they legitimately could have been (if the British police can obtain the list from David Miranda, so can anyone else). Still, I believe their intention was to publish a story that this information had been obtained by the NSA, not publish the information itself.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    112. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by chihowa · · Score: 1

      Treason is a very useful concept that has a very specific definition and applicability.

      Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

      The quintessential US traitor, Benedict Arnold delivered troop strength and locations to the enemy during an actual war. I'd say that is a pretty clear example of treason.

      If you use that example to draw your line, nothing Snowden has released to date gets anywhere near it. You could perhaps make a case for espionage, but this doesn't look like treason at all. If Snowden went to Afghanistan and started telling the enemy where US troops were, that would cross your line. Treason involves actually waging war against the US or conspiring with the enemy of the US. Exposing state secrets (of dubious legality, or that are simply embarrassing) is pretty hard to construe as "levying War against [the United States]," and only in the most vague and meaningless way, "adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

      .

      I said that you were implying that he committed treason because your post reads as though you feel he's crossed that line long ago and you're wondering what it will take for his dim-witted supporters to finally reach that conclusion. It seems like "asking a question" in the way that talk radio guy (whose name I can't remember for the life of me right now) "only asks questions".

      I'm no Snowden Supporter, but I do appreciate having this dirty laundry aired so that we can finally start making real steps toward having a less abusive government. If we make telling the US citizens what their government is doing treason, then it will take longer than decades for us to leash this beast.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    113. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you fucking serious? "fighting the long fight"? Are you telling me every fucking muslim is alqaida and that there is some sort of secret conspiracy where muslim hordes are trying to take over the world? Where the fuck have I heard something similar? Oh yes, it was Hitler and the Jewish Danger, but fortunately it's not "jews" that are dangerous, but unfortunately some new group called "muslims".

      Seriously, considering why muslims are moving to Europe and elsewhere, while we support dictatorships, do wars and previously colonised them it's no wonder they don't want to continue to live there. We left a big mess and continue to make sure it stays a mess.

      You are an idiot. Hitler would be proud of you except that he'd tell you psst, change "muslim" with "jew" as the propaganda you are spreading was conceived in the 1930s.

    114. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then it's really good that this whistleblower is giving information on the worst gang out there doing the most damage.

    115. Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? by elucido · · Score: 1

      Treason is a very useful concept that has a very specific definition and applicability.

      Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

      The quintessential US traitor, Benedict Arnold delivered troop strength and locations to the enemy during an actual war. I'd say that is a pretty clear example of treason.

      If you use that example to draw your line, nothing Snowden has released to date gets anywhere near it. You could perhaps make a case for espionage, but this doesn't look like treason at all. If Snowden went to Afghanistan and started telling the enemy where US troops were, that would cross your line. Treason involves actually waging war against the US or conspiring with the enemy of the US. Exposing state secrets (of dubious legality, or that are simply embarrassing) is pretty hard to construe as "levying War against [the United States]," and only in the most vague and meaningless way, "adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

      .

      I said that you were implying that he committed treason because your post reads as though you feel he's crossed that line long ago and you're wondering what it will take for his dim-witted supporters to finally reach that conclusion. It seems like "asking a question" in the way that talk radio guy (whose name I can't remember for the life of me right now) "only asks questions".

      I'm no Snowden Supporter, but I do appreciate having this dirty laundry aired so that we can finally start making real steps toward having a less abusive government. If we make telling the US citizens what their government is doing treason, then it will take longer than decades for us to leash this beast.

      I'm not implying anything by asking the question. Asking the question allows me to find out where everyone draws the line and where everyone is at. We all draw the line at a difference place. I never said Snowden was guilty of treason but some people think he is. I would say for certain he's guilty of espionage, and he looks like he's passing information to the Russians and Chinese because why else would he place himself in those countries?

      That is my opinion. If what he did results in an end to the abuse of NSA power then I will admit that he was right to take the actions he decided to take. I'm skeptical that what he did will end the abuses of power because he hasn't really exposed anything clearly abusive or illegal. The best thing that can come from this is perhaps a deeper congressional and senate investigation which finds actual abuses and then greater oversight on the NSA and on all intelligence agencies around the world.

      I will let the outcomes decide whether or not his actions were justified. To me it's not just about the NSA either, it's about all abusive intelligence agencies. They all seem to be allowed to abuse their power over citizens with complete impunity. At this time based on the current outcome I'm very skeptical of Snowdens motives, and he has released a lot of classified information which appears politically motivated which had nothing to do with abuses or crimes.

      So at this moment I don't view his actions as justified and cannot consider myself a Snowden supporter. I'm not in a position to know what options he had working for the NSA to report abuses or crimes. It could have been a situation where he had no one to report it to, but even if that were the case he could have released it to congress and senate instead of the media, unless we are to believe that the NSA controls the congress and senate too?

      My current conclusion on Snowden is that he's motivated by ideology and politics. It is unclear to me that any abuses have been uncovered and ended or that any civil liberties or rights have been protected by his actions. I don't understand what he is actually accomplishing, but it does not match up with what he claimed he was trying to accomplish to the p

  13. It may be a coincidence by sandbagger · · Score: 5, Funny

    But I can't find a single typewriter in any antique shops any more.

    --
    ---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
    1. Re:It may be a coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Relevant: http://typewritermovie.com/

      It's a documentary about the current state of typewriter usage.

      They are no longer produced due to limited demand. Businesses still use them for carbon copy forms, and some writers and hobbyists use them for the quaint factor or artistic reasons. The former group uses electric typewriters, which are still produced, while the latter two groups use different kinds. Those who use manual typewriters get them used, refurbished, etc. and may cannibalize machines for parts to repair other machines. They also don't constitute a large enough market to justify mass production.

      3rd world countries still use manual typewriters in business, due to limited grid reliability. Don't know how they will fair now that fewer factories produce the machines.

      Oh! and there is a company that makes electric typewriters with transparent cases for prisons.

    2. Re:It may be a coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's when pens vanish and ID is required to buy notebooks that I'll really worry,

      Winston Smith started out writing in a notebook, after all.

    3. Re:It may be a coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You lack Slack.

    4. Re:It may be a coincidence by Nyder · · Score: 1

      You lack Slack.

      Kill Bob.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    5. Re:It may be a coincidence by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      I suggest using totally disconnected computers for the purpose. You can even use Windows XP and Word if you like but make sure no network device is attached.

      Perhaps even close USB and remove DVD drives (use a second internal hard drive for backups) and print whenever needed.

      How is that plan?

    6. Re:It may be a coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try Russia, I heard that they are moving back to electric typewriters...

    7. Re:It may be a coincidence by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Applications may drop (now) geolocation, (in the past) serial and user data into every file created.
      Some bugs even dropped random user computer data into files until noticed.
      Expensive printers seem to have known per page tracking issues too.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:It may be a coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Putin bought the last few thousands.

  14. at what point do illegal, secret acts of war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    become recognized as conduct unbecoming the beacon of the free world?

    1. Re:at what point do illegal, secret acts of war by Jmc23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We aren't talking about the beacon of the free world, we're talking about the USA!

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    2. Re:at what point do illegal, secret acts of war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let him be. Circular reasoning is a basic requirement for a US citizen.

    3. Re:at what point do illegal, secret acts of war by lennier1 · · Score: 1

      War crimes have long since become an integral part of the repertoire of the so-called "free world". You just didn't get the memo.
      http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2013/08/01/bureau-investigation-finds-fresh-evidence-of-cia-drone-strikes-on-rescuers/

    4. Re:at what point do illegal, secret acts of war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One character less is better, the bacon of the free world!

  15. We the people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What bothers me about this is that it is unconstitutional.
    Fourth Amendment states "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."and it just rolls on.
    Foreign governments are aware of the spying and have countermeasures
    We the people have no countermeasures or oversight and are paying out billions for these people to invade our privacy.
    Please consider repealing the Patriot Act

    1. Re:We the people by wmac1 · · Score: 2

      As a non-American, every bit of this information makes me puke. Specially since last night when your president unilaterally and illegally announced another war on another middle eastern country, even the word USA makes me feel bad.

    2. Re:We the people by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      The US government apparently decided that "papers" should be taken literally, and thus it's open season on anything that's stored or transmitted digitally.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    3. Re:We the people by Cinder6 · · Score: 1

      Sounds to me that we need to make a mechanical, paper-based computer...

      --
      If you can't convince them, convict them.
  16. Welcome to the 21st Century by wrackspurt · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it be cool to display it somehow, not just text descriptions, but to watch it virtually rage across the globe. William Gibson wrote a short story called Burning Chrome that graphically in narrative form described the destruction of a virtual domain. Beyond Gibson's talent it would be cool to see what this stuff does in terms of infiltration and damage in some 3d medium.

    1. Re:Welcome to the 21st Century by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      http://www.youtube.com/thejuicemedia (via http://thejuicemedia.com/ has a display in video form :
      WHISTLEBLOWER - feat. Edward Snowden:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnMPQmIPibE
      French, Portuguese, German, Czech, Hebrew, Russian, Serbian, Dutch, Spanish, Japanese, Turkish lyrics translations are listed too :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  17. Serious question for the Linux community by Mr_Plattz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Like everyone else on slashdot, I only run Debian and must say I smile when I see reports such as country sponsored malware strikes like this. But it does make me ask an honest question:

    How can we be sure that the Linux kernel isn't compromised? I don't really have the time to go through all lines of code and I doubt my security analysis and development skills are up to the task anyway.

    1. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you should ask Linus?

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    2. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by caseih · · Score: 2

      That's a very good question. But you can also bet that there are a lot of parties around the world who have a strong interest in knowing if this is true or not. They also have access to the source code, and can build it themselves (I don't believe the NSA quite has the influence to propagate a Thomson compiler attack). I bet that if such a backdoor was discovered by China or Russia, that they'd use it as a propaganda weapon and we'd thus know about it.

      But in the meantime, we don't know that it's not compromised, but a compromise is not likely. Or at least not as likely as Windows, or any other commercial, closed-source operating system.

    3. Re: Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We don't and its safe to say that from the gov Linux is just as vulnerable as the rest

    4. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Like everyone else on slashdot, I only run Debian and must say I smile when I see reports such as country sponsored malware strikes like this. But it does make me ask an honest question:

      How can we be sure that the Linux kernel isn't compromised? I don't really have the time to go through all lines of code and I doubt my security analysis and development skills are up to the task anyway.

      I seriously doubt that Linux can hold up against attacks from *ANY* (determined) state-sponsored attackers. Unless you're writing your own obscure OS to run your own programs using a compiler with libraries are that you are sure not compromised.

      So.. yeah.

    5. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like everyone else on slashdot, I only run Debian...

      You lack Slack.

    6. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Like everyone else on slashdot, I only run Debian and must say I smile when I see reports such as country sponsored malware strikes like this. But it does make me ask an honest question:

      How can we be sure that the Linux kernel isn't compromised? I don't really have the time to go through all lines of code and I doubt my security analysis and development skills are up to the task anyway.

      Guess it's time to bring up the innovation of AmigaOS? OS that was decades ahead of it's time and NSA free!

      =)

      --
      Be seeing you...
    7. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gentoo has been my new slack....

      Start from hardened minimal and install only what you want. Use emerge -j option to parallel build with modern multi-core cpu's.

      It's like debian with apt-get-like installing but slack-like souce-code simplicity. I can go apply a patch and rebuild without fuss like with other distros.

    8. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      They don't need to backdoor the kernel, they can install stuff in the hardware your os runs on to do the same job.

    9. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by tftp · · Score: 4, Informative

      I bet that if such a backdoor was discovered by China or Russia, that they'd use it as a propaganda weapon and we'd thus know about it.

      It would be more realistic to expect them to use the backdoor to their advantage, while it lasts.

      Some backdoors are very hard to detect because there is no obvious bug or a backdoor in any one place; with the size of the code base as it is, who would be crawling through the source of some USB driver that works just fine? As a crude example:

      static int a[MAX_LENGTH];
      void ioctl_handler(int i, int d) {
      int *p = &a[0] + GetOffset(i, MAX_LENGTH);
      *p = d;
      }

      There is no bug here. Now, elsewhere:

      int GetOffset(int i, int len) { return (i < len?) i : (len-1); }

      Welcome to poking any RAM location of your choice (limited only by sizeof(int).)

    10. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Everything you connect Linux to is by default compromised. Every packet you send, every search term, every line of code you add or correct.
      So in theory and practice the code is safe. The first telco exchange/tower/branded box you connect is not.
      The hardware and software used to help Linux as part of a much larger setting maybe junk as the routers, switches and firewalls from multiple product vendor lines comment notes.
      You also have the hint of "“harvest” communications and tunnel into other connected networks" - why is this outgoing data not making any admin at that skill level sit up and start thinking?
      So the big threat may not be good quality code inspected my a few bright people world wide but the flexibility/power/cast savings/cooling offered by brand name devices on or off site that are the way in and out.
      The world needs smarter admins watching more of their kit beyond just the uptime and consumer needs.
      A work environment may have very long term guests that have total control over systems.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    11. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by fluffy99 · · Score: 1

      Like everyone else on slashdot, I only run Debian and must say I smile when I see reports such as country sponsored malware strikes like this. But it does make me ask an honest question:

      How can we be sure that the Linux kernel isn't compromised? I don't really have the time to go through all lines of code and I doubt my security analysis and development skills are up to the task anyway.

      But, but, aren't there "many eyes" reviewing the code, making it perfectly safe? At least you recognize the fallacy of open source software being more secure. In reality there really isn't an entire community reviewing and proofing the code. Just a handful of hackers pouring through it looking for exploits. It's less likely that it was intentionally compromised, but in some respects the linux kernel and distros are more vulnerable because their code is published.

    12. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by sjames · · Score: 2

      There is no fallacy there. It is *more* secure. That's only natural since it is open to examination by many more people with differing agendas and allegiances and there is no vetting process before they get access.

      What it isn't is *perfectly* secure. Nobody I know of is claiming that.

    13. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by EuclideanSilence · · Score: 1

      Were you actually able to compile this? Doesn't the unfinished use of the ternary "?" operator cause an error?

    14. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He transposed the ? and ) following it.

      It should read:
      int GetOffset(int i, int len) { return (i < len) ? i : (len-1); }

    15. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by blackest_k · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm wondering if many of us have backdoored ourselves with Skype.

      It has been reported that it accesses /ect/password and also reads the bookmarks in firefox. While the later seems harmless initially isn't this similar to the meta-data collected from email exchanges that the nsa is known to collect. I'm sure there is value in knowing what people are reading at some point you may become discontent enough to become a radical or terrorist.

      Unfortunately Skype is generally installed by giving the skype installer root access. There is no need to find an exploit when the system user installs your trojan willingly.

      We already know skype is not secure for communication and has changed from peer to peer communication to running via microsofts servers. However it is still pretty useful, about the best cross platform messenger client out there. I don't use skype to say anything that is likely to warrant any action from the nsa, so its not a real problem right?

      However the access that skype has to my machine is bothering me especially the potential access to passwords, am I giving the nsa the equivalent of ssh access to my machine?

      I believe its possible to install skype as its own user and without giving skype root at anytime but apart from some instructions on securing skype on arch wiki I can't find anything else.

      Is there anyone here who can share how to install skype sandboxed so it has a much more limited access to peoples machines?

      As someone who doesn't feel there is any reason for the nsa to want to snoop on him i still see some utility in skype (what is the cross platform alternative) but i really don't like the idea that the nsa already has access to my personal files and my passwords.

      It is a bit cocky to be thinking you're secure since you don't run windows, when you may well have welcomed in the nsa giving them the keys to your 'secure' systems.

       

    16. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by amaurea · · Score: 1

      Ah, the problem being that it doesn't check for negative i, allowing you to write before the start of a. That took me a while to see, actually.

    17. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it won't compile:

      $ gcc -c test.c
      test.c: In function 'GetOffset':
      test.c:8: error: expected expression before ')' token

    18. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I run debian too, but linux was made for performance, not security: try genode, minix, l4, other microkernels.
      Somebody pointed out the "trusting trust" problem. Some have approaches against it but the main problem IMHO is that you can't trust the hardware. I suggest pen paper and a one time pad, or... having no secrets.

    19. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by jon3k · · Score: 1

      run skype in vm problem solved

    20. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet the Chinese and Russians never found anything helpful despite their interest to blow the propaganda whistle. That does not make me comfortable because Snowden had to step in, becoming a more realistic target than if some foreign agency were to pseudonimously expose their research via a country's president...

      Anyway, it is a good time to bring up Linux safety, a suddenly juicier target into the same place we gradually abandoned the belief that "macs are virus free." If we can trust that hackers have a hierarchy of targets that sometimes caters to the one percent, be sure the NSA can follow the same. Remember the compromised encryption cypher they allegedly got to. Some noise, but no proof, and no countermeasures. It was a single minor one in a whole suite, which can make sense as proof of concept for the NSA

      It would be more likely to follow that pattern and pick a single distro based in the US, rather than the whole kernel that is more widely reviewed. Ubuntu and Centos make sense. I played with creating encrytion keys, but all were on windows, and wonder if they are useless because of that

    21. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      It has been reported that it accesses /ect/password

      Contrary to popular assumptions, /etc/passwd doesn't contain any passwords these days. What it does contain is a mapping of UIDs to usernames. This means that even such benign utilities such as ls access /etc/passwd. That's how ls -l can show you usernames instead of UIDs. Skype can't get your passwords from /etc/passwd and there are some very ordinary reasons for it to be accessing /etc/passwd.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    22. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were you actually able to compile this? Doesn't the unfinished use of the ternary "?" operator cause an error?

      Some syntax error is not the bug. The bug is there is no checking on lower bound of the offset. Any negative integer will work.

    23. Re: Serious question for the Linux community by fluffy99 · · Score: 1

      You are just repeating the fallacy. Having the code open to the world does little to make that code more secure, particularly when its something as complex as a kernel. The examples of a white hat noticing a vulnerability from reviewing the code and reporting it are very few compared with the number of vulnerabilities found by a black hat and turned into a working exploit. When a white hat reports a vulnerability, it usually found by observing the behavior of the code and then digging through the code, not the other way around.

    24. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That looks like a simple typo/thinko. I suspect the '?" was supposed to be outside the parenthesis, like so:

      int GetOffset(int i, int len) { return (i < len) ? i : (len-1); }

    25. Re: Serious question for the Linux community by sjames · · Score: 1

      You apparently do not understand relative risk. The black hats will be there in any case. if the software is open you will have the white hats as well. However few, some > none, any 5 year old knows that. So, the risk of getting caught inserting subversive code goes from none for proprietary code where you just extort the producer to some for the Free software. Again, some > none.

      It may be like saying juggling running chainsaws is safer than being a suicide bomber, but the statement is not a fallacy. The chances of subversive code going unnoticed in Free software are certainly smaller than in proprietary code.

    26. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm wondering if many of us have backdoored ourselves with Skype.

      It has been reported that it accesses /ect/password and also reads the bookmarks in firefox.

      $ strace -eopen whoami
      open("/etc/ld.so.cache", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/etc/nsswitch.conf", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/etc/ld.so.cache", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnss_compat.so.2", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnsl.so.1", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/etc/ld.so.cache", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnss_nis.so.2", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnss_files.so.2", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3
      open("/etc/passwd", O_RDONLY|O_CLOEXEC) = 3

      Reading /etc/passwd is how libc functions determine your username (assuming nss is configured to use "files" instead of "nis" or "ldap" etc, see /etc/nssswitch.conf)

    27. Re:Serious question for the Linux community by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Likewise Apple Facetime is now passing thru Apple servers, whereas it used to be peer to peer. And this, supposedly because of a patent troll.

  18. How soon before /. is taken down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At some point the U.S. government is going to snap and deny the internet to everyone until we comply with their master plan of freedom for all.

    1. Re:How soon before /. is taken down? by Jmc23 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Do you read slashdot? Lots of US patriots here who've been drinking the kool-aid their whole life.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    2. Re:How soon before /. is taken down? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      If we the posters dont have US/UK clearances and are just commenting on press stories that are not behind paywalls..... its just a thought crime for now.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  19. What is a good system admin to do? by niftymitch · · Score: 1

    What is a good system admin to do when presented with information like this?

    Companies large and small need to think long and hard about their responsibility
    in the presence of secret orders, nationally funded hackers with agenda.

    Data and data compromise by hook, by crook, by truck, by cloud collapse are all possible.

    Key management, process management and more need to be understood by managers.

    Companies have been coasting and relying on credentials to qualify their employees
    to the point that managers near and far only have computer science skills if you add
    Excel and Powerpoint to the curriculum.

    A good one should memo out to management for legal advice BEFORE the secret documents
    show up. Small companies should go in as a modest group splitting the legal fees. The number
    of legal counsels that would have a clue on this will be too limited but seek them out. Sadly
    the involved parties (legal) at big companies are now poisoned by the paper served on their company.
    This will get tangled and the best advice with regard to getting hacked or getting served can only
    be discussed before the event. Joseph Heller, George Orwell and Franz Kafka rule.....

    Time to dust of Gentoo and backups near and far.

    --
    Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
  20. Quest for power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The never-ending struggle to control everything in life, down to the last bit - simply because we can.

  21. I'm girding for the blowback by hohosforbreakfast · · Score: 1

    I'm in the US, and thanks to the our belligerence, I can now expect to try to defend my networks from the blowback from all this. Lovely.

    --
    Tony Jeffries
    1. Re:I'm girding for the blowback by elucido · · Score: 1

      I'm in the US, and thanks to the our belligerence, I can now expect to try to defend my networks from the blowback from all this. Lovely.

      What blowback? This isn't something that they didn't know already. Maybe they didn't know details and scope and this confirms it.

    2. Re:I'm girding for the blowback by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing that, if the US government is doing this, other governments will say 'open season'. They can hardly complain when the Chinese start breaking into computers all over the world and installing malware.

    3. Re:I'm girding for the blowback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think that they are voluntarily restraining themselves now or in the past?

    4. Re:I'm girding for the blowback by hohosforbreakfast · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is what I meant.

      --
      Tony Jeffries
    5. Re:I'm girding for the blowback by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Low cost, fast, new crypto hardware and later software was always very suspect from the 1970's on.
      Enigma gave the clandestine services a taste of near realtime information.
      Why would a top system admin or cryptographer not warn of past (1970-90's) insights into state sponsored network issues?
      The good news for all in the "defend my networks" community is great new books on gap or air wall and good code. Way beyond a chapter of trusted brands or code that 'just works' that the author wrote or likes.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re:I'm girding for the blowback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in the US, and thanks to the our belligerence, I can now expect to try to defend my networks from the blowback from all this. Lovely.

      The NSA will defend your network for you.

  22. Many eyes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are many people that work on the kernel, and even more students that study it. The kernel is of little concern. What is a concern is the thousands and thousands of little executables that are in so many distros. Worse still, how many people look through all the code from an average everyday apt-get?

    Doesn't really matter in the end as there is always the Underhanded C Contest to think about.

    1. Re:Many eyes by fluffy99 · · Score: 0, Troll

      There are many people that work on the kernel, and even more students that study it. The kernel is of little concern. What is a concern is the thousands and thousands of little executables that are in so many distros. Worse still, how many people look through all the code from an average everyday apt-get?

      Doesn't really matter in the end as there is always the Underhanded C Contest to think about.

      So please explain the number of kernel exploits over the past year.
      http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-33/product_id-47/cvssscoremin-7/cvssscoremax-7.99/Linux-Linux-Kernel.html
      http://www.zdnet.com/linux-trailed-windows-in-patching-zero-days-in-2012-report-says-7000011326/

      Linux had 14 kernel vulnerabilities this year versus 7 Windows kernel-mode vulnerabilities this year. (Just going by MS announcements for Windows 7, there may have been more unannounced issues)

  23. an international agreement by Max_W · · Score: 1

    Could governments to reach an international agreement, a treaty, with verification inspections to stop this network sabotage? I have severe unexplainable problems on my routers periodically.

    I could not explain it. I spent years trying to find a reason. Now I have got an idea.

  24. ao funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    looks like they know a "thing or two" about the conputery things

  25. Cyber perfidy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  26. typewritten documents can be traced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i mean... the wear pattern on the letters is a dead giveaway , tracks any document back to the specific machine that wrote it.

    and the shapes themselves correspond to makes and models of typewriters.

  27. It's not like... by MouseTheLuckyDog · · Score: 1

    every major country a lots of small wannabe0major countries aren't doing this. The question who is being successful.

  28. "Persist across software and equipment upgrades" by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If they have really developed software which can do that, they should share their techniques with the commercial world. Software that can continue to run even after a system upgrade? Sign me up.

  29. It's too general to be a clear breach by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

    This leak is analogous to reporting "The US recruits spies". Nobody knows whether their networks are compromised or what to look for.

    The kind of leak that hurts a country's covert operations is more like "The US pays Kim Jong Un's barber to make him look ridiculous".

  30. Who are these programmers? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Who are these programmers doing this, and where does the government find them?

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Who are these programmers? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      monster.com? This is no different than any intelligence operative (aka "Spy") working for the US. They're probably hired on as Computer Analysts or something mundane, then slowly brought into the fold once they have the appropriate security clearances.

  31. Truth's the limit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since the line for treason gets drawn by the government he is exposing, of course the answer is yes.

    The question is, does he care?

    I'm asking what line do Snowden supporters draw. Or should Snowden have no limit to what he can leak?

    He should be limited by the truth: the U.S. government protecting privacy as a fundamental asset of human interaction, an asset that has become much more important in the age of communication than when privacy was entered into the constitution.

    Too bad that the truth does not seem to make a satisfactory threshold here. But it's not Snowden who is to blame for that.

  32. Who are the terrorists now? by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    It is all getting so muddied up - who are the terrs now? The NSA and GCHQ are bigger threats to business IT systems than the traditional Romanian hackers. Of course all engineers and computer scientists always suspected as much, but the scope of the problem is rather larger than I ever suspected. I always assumed that these organizations have the capability to do targeted espionage attacks, but never thought that it will grow into blanket surveillance, for the simple reason that more data does not mean more information - it just means more garbage is collected and the NSA must be smothered with garbage data.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    1. Re:Who are the terrorists now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is all getting so muddied up - who are the terrs now? The NSA and GCHQ are bigger threats to business IT systems than the traditional Romanian hackers. Of course all engineers and computer scientists always suspected as much, but the scope of the problem is rather larger than I ever suspected. I always assumed that these organizations have the capability to do targeted espionage attacks, but never thought that it will grow into blanket surveillance, for the simple reason that more data does not mean more information - it just means more garbage is collected and the NSA must be smothered with garbage data.

      How can something done in secret be terrorism? /eyeroll

  33. What consequences? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm asking what line do Snowden supporters draw. Or should Snowden have no limit to what he can leak?

    Direct observation of the posts in the Slashdot petri dish reveal that for many of them there is apparently no limit, regardless of the consequences.

    What consequences? Has even a single perjurer been prosecuted? I mean, apart from Attorney General Eric Holder investigating himself for lying to congress under oath and finding himself to be an honorable man? Surrounded by honorable men in the government?

    Why should Snowden stop the leaks when there are no consequences? There are several dozens of billion dollars invested into projects for undermining the constitution, with money paid for by the public, and accountability kept away from the public. And there are no consequences for that.

    It's not like the NSA can work alone: it needs an executive taking equally secret actions. The U.S.A. has not just revived the Stasi with a vengeance, but also the Gestapo. Worldwide.

    And there are no consequences. It's pretty paltry what Snowden can actually achieve with his leaks. The most important thing is to tell other secret bearers that they are not entirely powerless. That a small percentage of people with a conscience can make a difference. That there is a point in working in the resistance against a fascist state bypassing constitution, accountability, division of powers and democracy on its mission to subjugate the world under its military and economic reign.

  34. Around the world by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Cheap dual ethernet motherboards see a jump in sales as whitebox testing units are constructed.
    A fast new cleanroom OS is loaded and deep packetsniffing code is carefully crafted.
    When the boss is home and clerical staff have packed up for the day...
    Ex staff and trusted colleagues load up their B2B and B2P machines with exciting new dual use orders from exotic locations.
    Will they see a hint of "routers, switches and firewalls from multiple product vendor lines" trying to “harvest” their efforts and phone home?

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  35. Cyber Combat: Act of War by sydneyfong · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Pentagon Sets Stage for U.S. to Respond to Computer Sabotage With Military Force

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304563104576355623135782718.html

    --
    Don't quote me on this.
    1. Re:Cyber Combat: Act of War by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I searched this thread for "act of war" to find your comment.

      What you didn't say, presumably because you left it up to the masses of asses to figure out, is that we're engaging in acts of war against nation after nation right now, because we are compromising computers in other nations and we ourselves have stated that this is an act of war.

      The government of the USA is the greatest criminal conspiracy that has ever been.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  36. So this means by compucomp2 · · Score: 1

    that we won't see any more sniveling, whiny, hand-wringing articles about how EVIL RED CHINA is murderously hacking poor innocent USA, and that the USA needs to declare war on them or something because this is an unprecedented and dastardly attack?

    Oh wait, oops, nope, that is typical Western sanctimoniousness on display, they will keep tooting the horn with no shame and continue the anti-China hate train, even though they've been revealed now to be total hypocrites.

  37. Re:"Persist across software and equipment upgrades by NettiWelho · · Score: 2

    I'm guessing they have already shared their... samples, with the 'commercial world', the commercial world isn't just yet aware of it.

  38. You've Got Mail! by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

    Welcome to the Botnet!

  39. Re:"Persist across software and equipment upgrades by Tom · · Score: 1

    It's not that hard to do. Remember that this is a mainstream media article, so the technical details are dumbed down.

    Malware that stores a re-install copy of itself in a hidden location isn't news. That they speak of "implants" to survive equipment upgrades leads me to believe they mean the whole thing, not an individual installation. This could be as easy as the malware instances monitoring each other and re-infecting remotely if one instance goes away. Again, at least conceptually that is 10+ years old. It's a nice feat if they pulled it off in practice, but it's not magic.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  40. just remember, friends... by jkg2 · · Score: 0

    ...as long as humans are involved it will always get cocked up somehow. The NSA isn't nearly as omnipotent or as all knowing as these "press releases" would have you think (just imagine how many other Snowdens are out there right now?) but often it is simply crass incompetence which is to blame. All organizations must deal with this to one degree or another, and the larger the organization, the greater the chance for human error.

  41. All supposedly for catching terrorists, right? by PapayaSF · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And yet Russia can call us up and say "Hey, there are two Chechen refugee brothers in Boston who we think are terrorists" and NOTHING HAPPENS.

    --
    Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
    1. Re:All supposedly for catching terrorists, right? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      Wow, I had completely forgotten about that. I honestly think that preventing attacks isn't as "fun" or "sexy" as computer hacking, so they just ignore or mishandle solid intelligence. You know how much we love to build "weapons", in this case it just happens to be in the form of code.

    2. Re:All supposedly for catching terrorists, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet Russia can call us up and say "Hey, there are two Chechen refugee brothers in Boston who we think are terrorists" and NOTHING HAPPENS.

      That's what the problem was. They Russians should have said: "they're running the biggest music download site in all of Chechnya!" and the FBI would have busted down their door within hours.

    3. Re:All supposedly for catching terrorists, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A few attacks here and there, now and then, keep the fear going.

      When asked why with all the power invested in them and their intrusion and surveillance methods and activities, they'll just say they didn't have enough access to enough data, thus feeding the drive for total surveillance. There are no guarantees, and the internal focus is on control, not preventing every, or even any, little incidents, just enough prosecutions of plots fomented by undercover agents to be able to tout as success.

    4. Re:All supposedly for catching terrorists, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're asuming that the powers that be in the US actually give a shit about their citizens.

      They don't.

    5. Re:All supposedly for catching terrorists, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd posted an observation about the oddity you mention, but, odd, that; /. has eaten at least two posts of mine in the past several days. Almost makes me thing someone out there doesn't like me or something.

  42. A lack of trust for my devices.. by GigaBurglar · · Score: 1

    So now I can't trust my keyboard, my router, my USB sticks, GPU, BIOS - vendors really need to start hardware locking flash ROMs.

    I have also started noticing "NSA proof" products and services as marketing buzzwords. The heat is being turned up - jump out the pot or boil.

    1. Re:A lack of trust for my devices.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turns out RMS was 100% right for a long, long time.

  43. Acts of war? by X.25 · · Score: 1

    Ok, so US considers attacks on its network 'act of war', but it has no problems conducting acts of war itself, 24/7?

    Interesting.

    Say again, who are the terrorists we should be afraid of?

    1. Re:Acts of war? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just read all the stupid cold war propaganda and you will be inoculated against the shit they want to insert into your brain these days. Start by reading about "Giant Lance". The biggest threat is government In General, not a particular flavour red or blue.

  44. Why really l33t hackers don't go to jail by aNonnyMouseCowered · · Score: 1

    It isn't hard to imagine that instead of being sent to jail all those evil hackers, once they're found out, are actually put to good use by the government (good being a very relative term). Puts a whole new dimension to the concept of plea bargain.

  45. As governments become shadier by santosh.k83 · · Score: 1

    As governments become shadier, the impetus for people to uphold honesty goes down too. Slowly it becomes a "anything goes" situation. I mean if a common man does X he's branded a cyber criminal and faces years in prison, while if a government does the same, not only are they above legal consequences, but even above moral consequences it seems. The more fanatical a group/government becomes, the more time and money they start spending on stridently insisting they are for the larger good. Watching this over and over again in all parts of the world. In other words, nothing has actually changed, but just that what promised to be a truly revolutionary thing (the Internet) has had it's full potential crippled and poisoned. Now it's almost just another corrupt institution, but even then, it's good still outweighs the bad. Imagine what could have been...

  46. Why "Sci-Fi" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is nothing SciFi about the extremely shitty software development procedures, practices and tools. The C language, void* pointers, char* pointers, multithreading tacked onto a single-threaded language and so on.

    The military (which NSA is part of) has just discovered a small flight of woodpeckers can destroy entire cities. No SciFi but intellectual laziness and moral corruption on the side of us - the Applied Computer Scientists, who created this fucking mess. We did it for the MONEY and we turned of any concern for MONEY.

  47. And who owns the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with this is human error is a simplistic systematic fact of life and 1 error and the NSA will lose control of its own weapons/system, so when the NSA gets ripped open by a new attack vector through the inevitable human error and owned by another entity being a state and or group.. What happens then?

    Its like the atomic/nuclear bomb, created and used against innocent people.. Will happen again with this technology.. Pandora's box v2 = NSA

    You could almost call the NSA the Digital Anti Christ...

  48. Countermeasure: Type Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Many if not most of these "cyber warfare domain" exploits can be traced to the C and C++ languages and the sloppy idioms (such as char* or void* pointers) which are prevalent amongst the users of said languages. Even highly skilled and experienced developers created things like the "ping of death".

    Then there is the PHP language, where they try to "make it easier and faster to create software by adding convenience features and removing typing" and the end result is a horrible mess of security-related side effects nobody seems to be able to get a handle onto.

    Sometimes I think both C and PHP were invented by people who considered Pascal and Ada as "too secure".

    In my opinion as an Applied Computer Scientist and Software Engineer (I do think this is a critical distinction from "programmer"), memory safe/type safe programming languages can significantly reduce the potential for exploitable bugs. So can sandboxing technologies like AppArmor, SE Linux or Sandboxie.

    We the computer science community need to do something about it or face the well of our wealth be poisoned by the psychological effects of cyber crime and cyber warfare: "Never store anything critical on a computer, don't you know everything is hackable !".

    I created a tailored AppArmor profile for firefox years ago and it cost me about a day. Every software engineer can do that, given determination.

    Then I spent serious time on making a memory-safe C++ variant named Sappeur:

    http://sourceforge.net/p/sappeurcompiler/code-0/2/tree/trunk/doc/SAPPEUR.pdf?format=raw

    http://sourceforge.net/p/sappeurcompiler/code-0/2/tree/trunk/

  49. Re:Time to neutralize Snowden and stop the harm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Always good to see Anglo-Saxon "rule of law" propagandists advocating assassination. Keeps my bottle of cynicism replenished.

    Why don't you simply drop your miserable body off a bridge and be done with your worm existence ??

  50. Re:Time to neutralize Snowden and stop the harm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russia and China both have much better things to do.

    You should be much more afraid of your own government, too much money too much time on its hands, its bound to be up to no good.

  51. Disconnect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It almost makes me want to slide the little wireless switch to "off." Almost.

  52. Re:Time to neutralize Snowden and stop the harm. by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    How is Russia an enemy? The cold war is over and yes there will always be Nation/Nation Spy vs. Spy shit going on. That the nature of governments and regimes as far back as recorded history. Even the Romans used spies as well as Hannibal who effectively had spies inside Rome. http://www.historynet.com/espionage-in-ancient-rome.htm

    What Snowden has done here is opened a view into a world that our government doesn't want us to see. Although I think the majority of what's been publicly produced has been damaging, deep down I think we knew our government was doing these kinds of things. Hey, those guys with the AFDBs weren't completely nuts, right?

    It's naive for us to believe that spying won't go on and that covert operations will stop after all these documents have finally been released. Governments will do what governments will do and I seriously doubt that there is one government on this planet that doesn't have some sort of covert operations going on somewhere. Hell, I'll even bet that Vatican City and Lichtenstein has some spy scandal in the wings. What's unfortunate about this situation is that we all learn how deep this goes and how our Constitution has been subverted. Snowden is just the messenger and while we're troubled with the message, we shouldn't shoot the one who brought us the message.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  53. Re:"Persist across software and equipment upgrades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would expect that in some cases, the network cards themselves have a rootkit on them. If the goal is to capture traffic, selectively or not, using the mighty network (or even disk IO for fancy scsi requirements) cards/controllers would be nice.

    The 10gb network cards designed for optimizing iscsi performance, and even 10gb cards that are just 10gb cards -- often have enough flash space on them to have an alternate OS, the performance to analyze network traffic, and can scale back if the actual needs of the card get swamped. I have never seen a server actually come close to theoretical maximum iscsi performance on a 10gb card (1gb yes, 10gb, no) in a typical setup. It was hard to optimize the 1gb to get such performance -- the 10gb has a lot of idle time on its hands because the IO rarely reaches that kind of speed due to various bottlenecks inherent in the SAN.

    In any event, I know there was a rootkit out for a Broadcomm 10gb adapter or two; perhaps one branded by the vendor selling the server. It had a packet sniffer and the ability to phone home the results, using the IP address of the card, or to send it to a centralized device on the network it was on, as a store and forward mechanism, and then that centralized server would process the data however and either allow one to pick up the results from it (to protect against IPS/IDS intervention, or logging details on equipment not yet or not going to be remediated for this purpose), or for later secure transfer to a remote site.

    The OS can be as secure as one could hope, and the network card is rarely examined.

    It reminds me of how people can make their PCs a lan bridge and proxy printer traffic by assuming the IP or mac address of the printer in question, get the print jobs, and then queue them to the printer via retransmission or a tunnel made to the compromised printer.

    Rarely do I see IT staff worrying about either of those things. The firewall, AV, and windows updates seem to be what businesses rely on, and most have little to no concept about what is actually on the network.

    In one situation I found a very well designed IPV6 network running alongside the IPV4; the company had no idea. All of their monitoring was based on IPV4. They said they were not running IPV6, but there was more IPV6 traffic than IPV4... tunnels, torrents and more.

    One thing I like to show people is how I can use wireless novell IPX. People say it is not even possible. Not true, I use it to play C&C Red Alert sometimes... lots of those old games require IPX, and it works fine wirelessly, even if emulated so long as the network card is accessible. You can even tunnel the traffic over a VPN if you have the right stuff... no one is looking for IPX traffic either.

    And how many printers are running IPX and Appletalk because no one disabled them when setting it up? About the same amount of places that do not put password on the telnet interface of the same printers.

  54. PSTN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time to break out my 56K modem

  55. Re:Time to neutralize Snowden and stop the harm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course, you'd rather not hear about how Snowden is wrong until you see large mushroom clouds in the distance.

    You don't understand.

    I WANT to see large mushroom clouds in the distance.

    And I hope your miserable piece of shit ass is at ground zero under one of them.

  56. NSA? by steeleyeball · · Score: 1

    We could do the Battlestar thing... No more networks, sneaker net only.

  57. i wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if this has anything to do with the number of tor users doubling and slowing the network to a crawl?

  58. Slashdot=Classified Information Dropbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is a disservice to my country to allow leaked information to end up on the pages of /.

  59. Re:holy shit - Linux is compromised as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux is compromised as well? I hadn't heard anything like that... do you have a source?

  60. How Embarassing by riondluz · · Score: 1

    We have become such a voyeuristic people. The NSA has been caught upskirting america
    looking for bombs everywhere. The risk is real, the probability low, impact high, outcome uncertain.
    We are strictly heirarchial, bureaucratic and clinging to law and order to CYA. It does not fit well with
    the new now.
    I'm engrained as a BSCS student that our industrialization was evolving into a 'knowledge-based' society
    that information is knowledge; more is better, faster is best. That we were meant to be mobile, portable.
    That our rising tide would trickle down and grow 3rd world economies; create shareholders of us each and all!
    Same bullshit on a different day; during 5 decades of a 'get off my lawn' ruling generation raised on
    Status quo and certainty, bankers hours and bakers dozens accustomed to getting their own way.

    For them, Internetworking opened a pandora's box of surprises; an eternal September.
    What started out as high hopes for outsourceing and automation to improve market share and drive a the investor classes
    only to ignomiously crawl back under rocks with their 2% of our IRAs and socialized bailouts..
    It should have come as no surprise at all when forced to wrap their collective heads around quants warning on risky
    asymetric outcomes, convex combinations, false-certainty and determimnistic chaos ...
    that its path of least resistance was in one ear and out the other.

    Pursuit of scientism and teathered to its tech has left us victims to incomplete information, self-confirmation
    bias and latent mind blindness. Our 'leaders' are intoxicated and behind the wheels of what
    the DARPA cocoon was always envisioned to become - a skynet, for lack of better words..

    Since Our guns don't seem to be effective (recursive COIN/CI failures) data mining and espionage and bots
    appears to be our (U.S. gov - any State, generally) only and best defense for long-term survival in a global
    economy where the indigenous we've suppressed for so long are now free to want more. Facing foreign competition
    lined up to satisfy those needs; the lo-tech and underdogs that seem to always prevail.

    Its not about America, its about (mostly) WASPS who, respectfully, believe that family and legacy come first.
    That parent has responsibility to provide more for their spawn, generational improvement. Even at the cost of compromises.
    That the powerful can cause so much damage when unrestrained and indifferent to the suffering of others is proof
    that when all is said and done the American Dream is just that and reality is gated and very private.

    Side Rant: all last week long its been MLK this and MLK that and civility being a natural right. Well, even as a dip-shit
    HS'er with 1 black student in the body I knew the right thing and coerced self to D.C. OK, it was big. But
    I also did the VN protests on D.C streets and witnessed up close the SNIC/SDS/Panther front-lines of activism.
    The makings of an worrysome insurgency. I believe rights got civil just about the time people (starting w/blacks)
    came back in pieces and with guns and the will to use them to defend their rights.
    Sad (CCA/DEA) story continues to this day, but some mention of MalcomX ,hell, the poor schmucks that
    are still incarcerated ,... would have been worth a mention.
    If MLK represented the wave, X was a surfer who crested the top.
    If we (american society) are going to survive we need leaders that surf and can rise to the top of 40' waves.

    --
    resist propaganda
  61. You advocate terrorism against the United States? by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    How telling.

    You'll just have to settle for a mod-bomb caused mushroom cloud from all the Snowden fans who hate this country.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  62. Re:Time to neutralize Snowden and stop the harm. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Given Russia's anti-American stance, the Cold War has only gained new actors.

    Snowden is simply one of the long line of people who have betrayed the United States, albeit one without a price on his head.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  63. Have some hot Russian tea and get back w/ me. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    There is a greater respect for the rule of law and individual freedoms in the United States than Russia. Offend Russia enough, you die; offend the US the same amount, the law dictates your fate(even if anti-terrorism law). In addition, Russian gated communities are legion, representing their desires of an above-the-law oligarchy; gated communities in the United States are far fewer given the deeper respect for the rule of law. Finally, Russia is deeply based on the bribery system (~$25k gets you Chaika-lane style access to the roadway, government interaction elsewhere requires bribery, and the private sector does as well); such activities are regularly discouraged and prosecuted in the US.

    Think about the country you're defending in comparison to the US. Any freedom you may claim to exist in Russia is only measured by the size of your bank account and the connections you have. In the United States, even the poorest citizen is well-defended.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  64. Re:Time to neutralize Snowden and stop the harm. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Russia and China both have much better things to do.

    Which has nothing to do to address the fact that he has not released anything on Russia or China, which would be give valuable insight towards truly unfree countries.

    I'm not worried about the United States' government, for it is in much better shape than Russia's, but more about those who would rather side with hostile enemies to attack it. Until Snowden (and those that have aided/abetted him - including those that have leaked information) is spending the rest of his life in a supermax, the primary goal is to neutralize him.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.