Slashdot Mirror
Brazil Admits To Spying On US Diplomats After Blasting NSA Surveillance
cold fjord writes with this excerpt from The Verge: "Brazil this week admitted to spying on diplomats from countries including the US, Russia, and Iran as part of a domestic program launched 10 years ago ... The program was first revealed in a Monday report from the newspaper Folha de São Paulo, which obtained documents from the Brazilian Intelligence Agency, commonly known as ABIN. The revelations come at a sensitive time for current Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff, who has been among the most outspoken critics of the widespread surveillance conducted by the US National Security Agency (NSA). According to Folha, Brazilian intelligence spied on rooms rented out by the US embassy in Brasilia from 2003 to 2004. ... The report also claims that ABIN targeted Russian and Iranian officials, tracking their movements within the country ... Rousseff's office acknowledged Monday that the spying took place, but stressed that the operations were carried out within the law. The administration added that publishing classified documents is a crime in Brazil, and that those responsible 'will be prosecuted according to the law.' ....the revelations may put Rousseff in an awkward position. The Brazilian president cancelled a state dinner with Barack Obama earlier this year ... and lashed out against US spying in an impassioned speech to the UN in September."
the article details some very basic surveillance of foreign personnel in the country. if brazil's intelligence service *wasn't* doing this, it would be a scandal.
I spy on you...
You spy on me...
We're a spying family...
With a great wiretap and a dead drop from me to you...
Why can't we just spy on everyone too?
Huh?
How is spying on foreign diplomats the same as mass surveillance of the ordinary citizens of your own country?
No sig today...
Comparing routine counter-intelligence operations with direct tapping of communications from a Head of State is, at the very least, an exaggeration.
Using "he\she" when talking about the Brazilian president is oddly appropriate...
morcego
It's almost as if governments, in general, are not to be trusted. Wow! Who would have ever imagined that their own government would do something like that? I mean, it is not as if every single government since the beginning of time as eventually gotten out of control or anything like that. Oh, wait....
This story reeks of the NSA trying to do damage control and doing a piss-poor job of it.
As best as I can tell it boils down to brazil having tailed some foreign diplomats while they were in country. OMG! So that makes them even with the NSA breaking into anything and everything on the internet. It's totally the same!
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
I fail to understand why international espionage comes as a shock to anyone. Nations (or states or political entities or nation-states or what-have-you) have been spying on each other since someone figured out that knowing more about someone than they know about you can give you an advantage.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
Following agents of a foreign country inside the territory of your own country is not the same as spying on the entire conencted population of the world. One is targeted and low key, aimed at the potentially nefarious activities of foreign nationals potentially connected to foregin security services, on your own territory, the other is a gross and global invasion of privacy. a total abuse of privileged position, a collosal breach of trust that undermines the safe usage of all forms of modern communication. No modern system that contains American or British electronics or communicates with systems or over connections held on the territory of those nations or their allies, is beyond suspicion. No router, no computer, no modem, no chip, no mobile. In fact those very devices should be considered as compromised and unfit for use.
Beautiful switch you did there, substituting "mass surveillance" for "spying on diplomats." I wonder how many people will notice?
By the way, how do you know that Brazil both doesn't do it, and isn't heading in that direction if they aren't?
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
Brazil wasn't upset with the US spying on its own citizens. Brazil got upset that the US spied on the Brazilian president and administration, with the Brazilian president postponing a trip to the US as a way of expressing anger. (Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/18/world/americas/brazils-leader-postpones-state-visit-to-us.html?_r=0).
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
I'm shocked that there's spying in this casino!
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Read the article.
Should they have been slightly less self-righteous when "blasting the US" last time? Sure.
Does this even remotely compare to the practices of NSA regarding foreign (allied) heads of state? Nu-uh.
The main difference is that this is happening on Brazilian soil.
Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
Pretty sure that no country on earth is "clean" at this point.
Keep this fully in mind when some country is spouting off on their outrage, or thinking about offering services because of their "strong privacy laws".
None of these bastards, nor their successors, will hesitate for a fraction of a nanosecond if they think they'll gain something by violation of your rights.
And if you think they will, because of something written down on a piece of paper someplace, you're fucking deluded.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
The difference is that the US makes such a big deal about being free, that irony continues to gush uncontrollably from the whole NSA scandal, the PATRIOT act, the TSA bullshit, the constant invasions of other countries, the attempts at blocking healthcare for poorer citizens, etc, etc...
which is totally what she said
Sauce for the goose? Or is it crow? I wonder how they prepare crow in Brazil?
Crow is rare in Brazil, but they'd probably try it churrasco or rodizio style. Slather it with sal grosso, spit it, and cook it over flames. gostoso!
governments routinely spy on eachother. Governments do not routinely spy wholesale on the citizens of other nations and claim it as their privilege.
The concern remains as stated: a country that practices rendition, torture, and indefinite detention without trial is now spying on anyone and everyone. this is a country that has operated secret prisons and invaded without cause soverign nations. America bombs indiscriminately anyone it decides through secret process to be an enemy combatant with any unintentional target in the bombing posthumously declared an enemy combatant. This is a country that is perpetually at war, maintains the highest prison population in the world, and its now spying for all intents and purposes on absolutely everything and everyone. In my opinion as an American, concerns from the international community are absolutely valid and reasonable.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Ah yes, the "He did it too!" defense. Now, what was it that mom or dad would say when you said that?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I thought Brazil was also upset about this:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwald-guardian-partner-detained-heathrow
(Government harassment of Brazilian journalists who expose NSA mass surveillance for the non-clickers).
No sig today...
How is spying on foreign diplomats the same as mass surveillance of the ordinary citizens of your own country?
They aren't the same.
Brazil however doesn't give a shit if America spies on its own citizens.
Brazil was upset because America spied on Brazilian citizens.
Different perspectives.
Dear NSA,
The fact that another country spies on the US doesn't make what you did any more legal, acceptable or less egregious.
Sincerely,
Most of the US population
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
how do you know that Brazil both doesn't do it, and isn't heading in that direction if they aren't?
Because here in Brazil the government underfunds everything military or related due to the fact that since two decades every civilian government we've had was composed of people who were enemies and/or were persecuted by said military during our dictatorship, and hence deeply, deeply dislike them.
ABIN in particular is a joke. They have no actual technological prowess nor are they going to develop any. Maybe on the very long-term they do, but right now nope, not a chance.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
The main difference is that this is happening on Brazilian soil.
Actually I think the main difference is technical superiority. If the <insert country upset about the NSA that also has their own spying programs> had the same capabilities as the US, does anyone in the real world really believe that they wouldn't be doing the same damn thing? In espionage you don't say "well we could tap the phones of the leader of the target country/organization, but that wouldn't be nice so we'll just tap the low level people instead". The whole point of what any of these agencies do is to get as deep into their target as possible.
I'm not excusing some of the things the NSA has done. I'm just pointing out that there is no large scale government out there that doesn't have a spying program and those spying programs are equally as greedy as those in the US (even if they aren't as capable).
And this... http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/canada-s-spying-touches-nerve-in-brazil-susan-ormiston-1.2054334
We've been doing our damndest to change that, but when close to half the population -knowingly- and -willingly- supports said practices, plus benefits from a military-industrial economy that is geared up to specifically support that, then change is going to be a long time coming. Almost half our populace is tribalistic to the point where they are willing to support all of what you described, simply because it's done to those who aren't members of the tribe. Furthermore, the easy political solutions to this (liberal fascism, abolishment of the Congress and turning the Executive into a true tyrant, etc) come at too high a cost. What you're arguing about is the dark side of human nature... come back to me when you've come up with a cure that doesn't involve tyranny or death.
Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
The next time you say, "how the fuck did they not see that coming," remember that you were the one who told them to keep their eyes closed and their ears covered.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Yes actually.
Countries like France and Germany have larger economies than the UK so could trivially be doing the same kind of blanket spying GCHQ has been doing but they don't.
So yes I genuinely believe there are countries who don't do what the NSA and GCHQ does, not because they can't, not even because they can't afford to, but because they either realise it's morally unacceptable, or that spying on your average citizen is just going to land you with more data than you can possibly do anything useful with which is why the Boston bombings still happened and why a soldier was still brutally murdered on British streets despite the people who committed those acts being known to the security services in both cases.
Staff at the NSA and GCHQ were probably just too busy giggling to themselves about some intercepted teenagers cybersex session that they stumbled across randomly to spot the guys that the Russian and South African security services had explicitly warned them about before it was too late.
There are both moral and logical reasons for not doing broad blanket surveillance of everyone you can as opposed to classic focussed intelligence work and the NSA and GCHQ are the only ones who don't seem to get that which is why despite their "technical superiority" coupled with no shortage of old school warnings about specific individuals by allies and enemies alike the US and UK are still both the most prominent targets of and arguably the largest victims to terrorism in the West.
Pretending "they're just jealous that they can't do this" which is what you're basically implying just gives them an excuse that is not valid and that they do not deserve.
So you are saying that the US should be not as bad as Iran and Russia, and then it's all cool. Really? You think that's a good stand to take??
Trusting fool. How do you know the don't? Because they say so?
France in particular has a long history of spying on _everyone_. Their national intelligence agencies even work for private companies, just to help them make sales.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
...is hardly comparable to spying on foreign heads of state in their own countries, or even spying on your own citizens.
Not at all. This isn't about one child claiming that the other child took a cookie, too. This is one child, upon finding out that the sibling took a cookie, says, "oh my, you know you should never, ever take a cookie without permission!" only to have to admit 5 minutes later that they surreptitiously took a cookie too.
OK, so now spying on a handful of diplomats (Read: spies by another name) within your own borders is exactly equivalent to gobbling up and storing indefinitely the communications of every single human on the planet? You do realize there's just a bit of a difference in scale and scope, don't you?
This isn't about whether it's right or wrong, it's about getting caught in a double standard.
Is it against Brazilian law to spy on diplomats within Brazil? Because if not, then no, there is no double standard - Brazil would be operating within the constraints of their own legal system, whereas the US government is decidedly not following the Constitution.
Plus, all that stuff I said before about scale and scope; not all sins are equal.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
TFA says:
The administration added that publishing classified documents is a crime in Brazil,
and that those responsible "will be prosecuted according to the law."
Countries like France and Germany have larger economies than the UK so could trivially be doing the same kind of blanket spying GCHQ has been doing but they don't.
International spying is not a trivial thing that is solved purely by money. China, Russia, the UK, and the USA are the only major players because they are the ones that have been doing it for a long time (China is the upstart, but there are multiple reasons for their quick up take beyond just money) and continue to focus on it.
I would agree that some of those countries focus their resources in other places which indeed impacts the technical ability (both toys and ability to use them effectively) of their agencies, but if they suddenly redirected resources it wouldn't change things in the near term.
So yes I genuinely believe there are countries who don't do what the NSA and GCHQ does, not because they can't,
I'm sorry, but you are childishly naive about human nature if you truly believe that. For it's security a nation needs to know as much as possible about both it's friends and foes. That is an undeniable fact. The question becomes one of balance with the other things that is expected of the government. A central similarity between the main players is that they have allowed (willingly or not) their governments to go to extreme ends for "safety".
I would also point out that a few months ago the average American would have (equally naively) argued that the US doesn't go to the levels that has now been made clear. Just because a spy agency hasn't been caught doing such things doesn't mean that they aren't doing it and to trust that they aren't is sticking your head in the sand.
Pretending "they're just jealous that they can't do this" which is what you're basically implying just gives them an excuse that is not valid and that they do not deserve.
I'm not pretending anything. The whole point of spying is to get as much data as you can about the target. That's it. Nothing more. The problem comes into when there is little or no oversight to control how far that goes. In the US the oversight (such that it is) isn't ruled by some moral compass (and I doubt it is in most other places either). Such oversight is done through politics so each decision comes down to either "how can I benefit" or "how will this hurt me" in regards to the political career. There is no room for purity in successful politics or spying.
The history shows that countries gather intelligence on each other in any way they can. It would be irresponsible not to do so. Based on anything I know about international diplomacy I would be absolutely amazed if any country refrains from gathering data for ANY reason other than actual inability to do so. Of course US has more power in this regard than Brazil but I'm pretty sure countries like China and Russia are doing everything US is doing and more.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
Rousseff doesn't give a f*ck about whether the NSA spies on Americans and that's not what she was complaining about.
Rousseff was complaining about American surveillance of Brazilian diplomatic staff, and that makes her a hypocrite.
I'm not a trusting fool, I'm just not a paranoid conspiracy theorist.
GCHQ got caught because it did it with the Americans. How exactly would France etc. get away with it? You don't think GCHQ etc. would find their cable taps when placing their own at key UK transit points as the NSA had to do?
We know France isn't doing large scale internet tapping for the simple reason they'd be named in the NSA files alongside GCHQ and Australia intelligence services.
The rest of your post just confused targeted spying which I never said they didn't do our argued against with the dragnet operations of global internet and telephony data that I was talking about but you obviously missed that in your bile fueled nationalist rage about the suggestion that anyone could dare suggest the the five eyes nations were doing this on a far worse scale than anyone else.
Technology yes, but I think it is more about Corporate affiliation. The NSA are basically using corporate infrastructure to spy on the cheap, They demand these companies do so. These are *supposedly* global international companies. If Brazil went to Apple and said I demand all the information you have on Obama, what do you think the response would be? Vice Versa? Should nations be scared of using technology produced by america? Yes. This is why since the Patriot Act came into being, I would never ever use any cloud based system, particularly should the servers be physically located in the US (which most are).
It isn't so much a technological advantage, it is more that the most of the companies that do, are american, and are beholden to the government. Which is actually pretty funny to say considering how sold out the government is to corporate masters, I guess it goes both ways. Makes me think of those dystopian futures where the world is controlled not by national countries, but blocks of affiliated corporations. GO Capitol Corporation!
Truly I think it is ironic that it was the US not that long ago, making grave accusations of the PRC and the production of hardware and software that might be used for spying with built in backdoors etc... When really the whole time doing it themselves. American Policy on Everything: Do as I say, not as I do! :)