Slashdot Mirror


CBS 60 Minutes: NSA Speaks Out On Snowden, Spying

An anonymous reader writes "This week CBS New's 60 Minutes program had a broadcast segment devoted to the NSA, and additional online features. It revealed that the first secret Snowden stole was the test and answers for a technical examination to get a job at NSA. When working at home, Snowden covered his head and screen with a hood so that his girlfriend couldn't see what he was doing. NSA considered the possibility that Snowden left malicious software behind and removed every computer and cable that Snowden had access to from its classified network, costing tens of millions of dollars. Snowden took approximately 1.7 million classified documents. Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns. Snowden's activity caught the notice of other System Administrators. There were also other interesting details, such as the NSA has a highly competitive intern program for High School students that are given a Top Secret clearance and a chance to break codes that have resisted the efforts of NSA's analysts — some succeed. The NSA is only targeting the communications, as opposed to metadata, of less than 60 Americans. Targeting the actual communications of Americans, rather than metadata, requires a probable cause finding and a specific court order. NSA analysts working with metadata don't have access to the name, and can't listen to the call. The NSA's work is driven by requests for information by other parts of the government, and there are about 31,000 requests. Snowden apparently managed to steal a copy of that document, the 'crown jewels' of the intelligence world. With that information, foreign nations would know what the US does and doesn't know, and how to exploit it."

108 of 504 comments (clear)

  1. Meta-data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We know who your friends are we know where your children go to school, keep quiet and it will all be aright......

    1. Re:Meta-data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Metadata is nothing more than data to begin with. This distinction is absolutely absurd. Capturing the actual data wouldn't really be any more difficult for them, so how is that magically more private? It isn't. They're just abusing past irrelevant, ignorant court decisions for their own gain.

  2. Rah! Rah! NSA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So it sounds like it will be pro-NSA spin-doctoring from our crony-corporatist media.

    1. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by SirGarlon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In order for there to be a meaningful public discussion about government surveillance, the surveillance agencies need to be able to state their position. Indeed, it is hardly possible to refute their reasons for surveillance unless they have a chance to state them.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    2. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by poetmatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      CBS has never been anything other than sucking at the teat of corporatism. It's not an accident they didn't cover the arab spring, OWS or anything other than pro-us government leaning views until they were widely broadcast everywhere else.

      In short - if it's affiliated with any TV network public or private, then you're not the customer. The corporations are.

    3. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So it sounds like it will be pro-NSA spin-doctoring from our crony-corporatist media.

      I was thinking that 60 Minutes is now broadcasting fiction.

      Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns.

      Assuming that's true ...

      Like they'd do anything about it and if he did, he could kiss his job good-bye and he would be told to shut up. And even if he ignored them and started blabbing on the Internet and media, who'd believe him? Without documentation, he's just another conspiracy theorist.

      Targeting the actual communications of Americans, rather than metadata, requires a probable cause finding and a specific court order.

      Yep, it does require it but they don't give a shit. They do it anyway.

      NSA analysts working with metadata don't have access to the name, and can't listen to the call.

      I do NOT believe this. Anyone who does is a rube.

    4. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They've been "making their case" for years. This is nothing but spin doctoring and character assassination not an honest debate.

    5. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Insightful

      but they have been lying about their position many times.

      also, why would NSA consider amnesty for Snowden? it is not NSA's job to consider that nor is it in their jurisdiction, at least it's not supposed to be.

      less than 60 americans? so 10 million in equipment per? really? shouldn't the number be zero anyways and surveillance on those sixty americans be done by the FBI?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by H3lldr0p · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And they can do this without resorting to channels that are known first and primarily as propaganda machines.

      Because, and let us be honest here, part of the reason why we are in this position is that the media in the US are not there to provide the informational bulwark so that we may function as close to an ideal republic as we can. They currently exist to sell us things and to make us feel better out said purchases. This extends to the government at all levels. Who better to give an interview to than the very apparatus that is there to appease and not investigate?

    7. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by StoneyMahoney · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In some ways the NSA are their own worst enemy in this situation. Snowden leaked huge quantities of documents directly from the horse's mouth, so to speak, that broadly incriminates the NSA of a host of crimes they were supposedly able to self-regulate against. The problem they have now is one of credibility - they have no channel through which to put out their version of the story that will allow it to carry the same credibility as Snowden's leak.

      I work in the media sector and myself and know that no self-respecting spin doctor could get this so badly wrong as it seems on the surface - there was a target demographic of supreme importance that they hit square in the face for some reason. Not that I can go looking for them from the other side of the pond...

    8. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by mean+pun · · Score: 2

      Ok then, but the same principle still applies. For a liar to be caught in a lie, he has to speak first. Moreover, it is interesting to see what they are and are not lying about. Of course, it would be very healthy if there would be some consequences when they lie...

    9. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by Desler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For a liar to be caught in a lie, he has to speak first.

      Oh so someone other than James "Least Untruthful Answer" Clapper or the Jean-Luc Picard wannabe Keith Alexander? I'm pretty sure both of them having been saying lots of things.

    10. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by khallow · · Score: 5, Informative

      Um.... what do you call CBS if not a channel through which "they" can put out their version of the story?

      How can CBS verify that the NSA is doing what they claim to be doing? For example, there's this claim that the NSA is only spying on 60 or so US citizens. How would CBS know that versus the NSA spying on 60 million US citizens? CBS has no way to distinguish this because all of that is secret. They're just a higher visibility platform than some vanity blog with three readers. They have no more ability to bring credibility to the claims that the NSA makes.

    11. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      the surveillance agencies need to be able to state their position.

      Surveillance agencies should not even have an opinion. Their job is to do what The People tell them to do. Their job is not to advocate for any position.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    12. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      Given enough "meta data" you can actually construct a reasonable facsimile of what the data actually is. In some cases, it is more valuable than the data itself.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    13. Re:Rah! Rah! NSA! by sgt_doom · · Score: 2

      Somehow, this NSA infomercial neglected to mention the lies told by Graham and Clapper to congress, which should constitute treason at the very least!

      Somehow, this NSA infomercial neglected to mention that Gen. Clapper was part of Geo. Bush's "fabricated WMD intel in Iraq" team, and lied his ass off on behalf of the Bush administration and WMDs in Iraq.

      Somehow, we still don't have any forensic audits to see how many millions are wasted daily at the CIA, NSA and DIA (by wasted, one means they are both siphoned off for their profit, and shifted offshore for their future profit).

  3. Stole exam answers? by bazmail · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The character assassination of Snowden begins.

    1. Re:Stole exam answers? by TWiTfan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I was thinking the exact same thing when I watched it. Guess they couldn't trump up a rape charge, so that was the best they could do (for now, anyway).

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    2. Re:Stole exam answers? by garyok · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So he broke into a secure environment, serruptitiously obtained confidential and/or classified information, and used his take to successfully gain a competive advantage over his peers? And somehow this makes him unsuitable for employment at the NSA? If he'd just 'fessed up he'd be the first new guy to start his job with an employee of the month award.

      --
      One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors - Plato
    3. Re:Stole exam answers? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The character assassination of Snowden begins

      No, it began when the Scotland Yard and the GCHQ tried to pin Snowden with the Pedophiles.

      http://slashdot.org/story/13/11/07/038216/edward-snowden-leaks-could-help-paedophiles-escape-police-says-uk-government

      Then NSA returned the favor and attacked Julian Assange

      http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/12/13/012210/was-julian-assange-involved-with-wiretapping-icelands-parliament

      This is the third round.

      There will be a fourth, a fifth, a sixth, and their intention is very simple -

      The want to fill the media media with LIES.

      They want to fill the world with SO MUCH LIES that nobody can discern truth from lies.

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    4. Re:Stole exam answers? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Funny

      So he broke into a secure environment, serruptitiously obtained confidential and/or classified information, and used his take to successfully gain a competive advantage over his peers? And somehow this makes him unsuitable for employment at the NSA? If he'd just 'fessed up he'd be the first new guy to start his job with an employee of the month award.

      I know it marks me as a giant nerd, but that still makes me think of the written chuunin exam in Naruto, where the whole point was to cheat on it without getting caught...

    5. Re:Stole exam answers? by jma05 · · Score: 5, Informative
    6. Re:Stole exam answers? by ShaunC · · Score: 2

      Not only that, but wasn't he already working for NSA (or Dell, as a contractor) when he "stole" the test and its answers? It's not like he used that information to somehow illicitly get his job, he was already working there. It doesn't even make sense to use that to smear him.

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    7. Re:Stole exam answers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of course it was character assassination. They did a whole bit about how he could have left a virus on the system. And then went into a whole other bit about a virus that could shut down every computer in the world and destroy the world economy.

    8. Re:Stole exam answers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ooooOOOOOoooohhh...

      Now it's clear why he jumped ship and spilled the beans on the NSA:

      Snowden had been brought to Hawaii as a cybersecurity expert working for Dell’s services division but due to a problem with the contract was reassigned to become an administrator for the Microsoft intranet management system known as Sharepoint.

      As a developer who was once given the task of managing and developing Sharepoint, I find his actions to be perfectly balanced and justifiable.

  4. Oh NSA by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns.

    Good idea too. Everyone else who did (that we know of) was fired and investigated. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Andrews_Drake

    >The NSA is only targeting the communications, as opposed to metadata, of less than 60 Americans. Targeting the actual communications of Americans, rather than metadata, requires a probable cause finding and a specific court order.

    We don't believe you, and quit targeting my metadata without a warrant.

    1. Re:Oh NSA by dmbasso · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And approaching supervisors worked pretty well for Manning... [/sarcasm]

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    2. Re:Oh NSA by Heed00 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And, of course, there's a difference between actively "targeting" and collecting "incidentally" or "unwittingly." To deny the former does not exclude the latter. These guys lie for a living and love muddying the waters by using specific terms in specific contexts to sound like blanket denials which, in reality, turn out to be almost meaningless declarations.

      And yes, metadata can easily be more intrusive than content.

      --
      Thought thinks itself.
    3. Re:Oh NSA by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Informative

      Exactly. It's weasel words. "We're only targeting 60 Americans" might be true, but it leaves an impression that they're only capturing data on 60 Americans when what it really means is "We're capturing metadata on EVERY American, but most of that data goes into our servers to be accessed/searched on later. Right now, we're only looking at the actual communications for 60 Americans, but that could change at any moment if we deem it to be needed for any reason we think up."

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    4. Re:Oh NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      FTA: Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns.

      I was a Federal whisteblower, on two cases. Being a whistleblower will get you followed, framed, and fired — at the least. In my case, additional, externally directed efforts were made to strangle me financially, and to destroy my career.

      Don't do it. They will destroy you.

    5. Re:Oh NSA by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right. If it's only 60 Americans, why are you building a massive data center in Utah?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  5. The NSA is so Credible by twmcneil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who in their right mind would believe anything the NSA says? They have lied to everyone about everything.

    --
    "The ferrets, they're every where I tell you!"
    1. Re:The NSA is so Credible by TWiTfan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If they're willing to openly lie to Congress, does anyone think for a second they wouldn't openly lie to the press? When NSA reps speak now, I don't even bother listening for how they parse their language. They're not even trying to *technically* tell the truth--they're just flat out lying, period.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    2. Re:The NSA is so Credible by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

      The people like cold fjord who would continually piss themselves over "Mooslem" boogeymen without Big Brother tucking them in at night. 9/10 chance that this "anonymous" person is cold fjord.

    3. Re:The NSA is so Credible by NatasRevol · · Score: 4, Informative

      They didn't lie to the press, they WERE the press.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Miller_(journalist)

      " He is the former Associate Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Analytic Transformation and Technology.[1] Prior to that, he was an Assistant Director of Public Affairs for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), where he was the bureau's national spokesman."

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    4. Re:The NSA is so Credible by akozakie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The funny thing is how few of the comments in the media talk about the Snowden's case in the only context that makes even the pro-national-security-collect-everything guys stop and think.

      As far as we know, the guy wasn't being paid for this. Wasn't specifically pre-trained for this. Had no external help. Just look what he managed to get access to. Now couple this with the thinking behind the "I told you" comments saying "see, it was possible and bam! the NSA was actually doing it". Now see how many people the NSA has.

      The discussion whether the utility of having these data trumps privacy or constitutionality concerns is moot. Snowden showed the honestly funny truth. If he could do it, other competent intelligence agencies are doing it. NSA is in fact (unintentionally, of course) collecting data on Americans for Russians/Chinese/whoever. They are a wonderful source - a bit hard to get to, but once you do...

      The NSA wants to stop any attempts to restrict its data collection (citing national security), because regaining lost privileges is a bit hard and they like what they have. But - as explained above - national security dictates that NSA's data collection should be immediately minimized. Know what you must and control it. As you grow, you're easier to penetrate. As is, Snowden made NSA look like a glaring hole in the security of US of A. Ironic, isn't it?

      Not that I care. Not my country, not my business...

    5. Re:The NSA is so Credible by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But as an American, I could not care less how bad the proverbial boogeymen "other countries" are. It is the US government that has the power to arrest me, not the goons running some random African hellhole.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  6. Biased much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Could this be more biased in favour of the NSA? I don't think so. It reads as pure propaganda.

    The fact is - the NSA, and the US government, has consistently been lying to the American people. Consistently. The Guardian publishes one thing, the US responds, and then the Guardian publishes another clearly indicating how the US government lied. Time and time again. How many times do we have to go over this?

  7. Cables are dangerous by Noughmad · · Score: 5, Funny

    NSA considered the possibility that Snowden left malicious software behind and removed every computer and cable that Snowden had access to from its classified network, costing tens of millions of dollars.

    Because next time I write a virus, I will use it to infect a UTP cable.

    --
    PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    1. Re:Cables are dangerous by xtal · · Score: 3, Informative

      Cables are dangerous.

      http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Takes+a+Page+From+Monsters+Book+Offers+50+Thunderbolt+Cable/article22041.htm

      That nice looking molded CAT6 cable could have any number of surprises inside...

      --
      ..don't panic
    2. Re:Cables are dangerous by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 2

      I know you're being funny, but the NSA does have a reason to get rid of all hardware too.

      http://www.spybusters.com/Great_Seal_Bug.html

      In theory a cable could be used as an antenna, they probably have some working group at the NSA that does just that, hell they probably think Snowden stole the document about it.

    3. Re:Cables are dangerous by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

      It's perhaps more telling that they fear cables -- the NSA probably has cables mabufactured with eavesdropping tech in them. Tapping into same is one of their known methods, so a simple cable replacement will probably go undetected by the targets.

      I.e. no black box around the cable with blinking red lights, like a movie. Just a normal-looking cable is there.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  8. Snowball animal farm Snowden from reality by Infestedkudzu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does this just seem like the heaviest kind of propaganda on how bad snowden is. the whole thing is just emphasizing how 'horrible' he is and making no mention of how unacceptable Almost all NSA actions are. Its when I post to these articles that I wonder how much slashdot articles get red flagged.

  9. Entrance exam by ATMAvatar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Isn't stealing the answers part of the exam to get into a spy agency?

    --
    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    1. Re:Entrance exam by BonThomme · · Score: 2

      neutralize the proctor for extra credit

  10. Puff piece by TWiTfan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Never asked the obvious questions. "If you really aren't storing all our emails and phone calls, then why do you need to build a new $1.5 billion facility to hold exabytes of data storage? Either you're lying or you're guilty of a SERIOUS misappropriation of funds. So which is it?"

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    1. Re:Puff piece by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Have you considered that maybe they need to store data that's not your e-mails and phone calls? I mean, their focus is primarily foreign surveillance.

  11. Lie-fest from the NSA by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Other than lies, lies and more damn lies, what else can NSA come up with ?

    No matter how slick or how polished their lies be, NSA's lies are still LIES.

    NSA has betrayed America.

    NSA has betrayed the Constitution.

    NSA is a rogue organization within the government of the United States of America.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by rvw · · Score: 5, Funny

      Other than lies, lies and more damn lies, what else can NSA come up with ?

      Statistics!

    2. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by g0bshiTe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My thoughts exactly, to that end it seems now the thing to do is to discredit Snowden who I consider a true patriot.

      Of all the things said about him by the NSA the one thing that strikes me about the whole case is that nowhere ever is it mentioned he did it for money or anything other than to expose what the NSA was up to to the world.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    3. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by DrLang21 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns."

      And how would they expect that to be responded to if he did? "Keep your mouth shut if you know what's good for you."

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    4. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 5, Interesting

      NSA IS the government of the United States.

      No, the NSA Surveillance Destroys Diplomacy and Democracy:

      How do democratically elected officials (the president, congressmen or senators) get control of a stand-alone secret government bureaucracy that was operating long before they arrived and will survive them after they've gone? A bureaucracy that knows everything there is to know about them, too?

      They don't. They can't. So the surreptitious, illicit actions of a US spy agency can undermine the diplomatic work of months and years. And the president - the elected official chosen to lead the country - is so hamstrung by the NSA that he cannot stop the interceptions and order an immediate investigation.

    5. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If he expected to be treated like previous NSA whistleblowers or previous Obama era whistleblowers/leakers, why would he do that?

      At best he could talk to someone like Ron Wyden or Mark Udall. Except they already knew what kind of shit the NSA was doing and couldn't say or do anything about it.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    6. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by Bomarc · · Score: 5, Informative

      I could only watch the first part of the lies by the NSA, and the failure of 60 minutes -- John Miller to follow up.

      For starters -- Snowden didn't steal anything: he copied it (minor detail).

      What Snowden did was compared to killing 10 people. Snowden didn't kill anyone.

      We were told that NSA can't access information unless they had a warrant: Again, false on many occasions, some documented here on /. (Do I *really* need to provide the references?) The NSA continually provides information to law enforcement agencies w/o warrant.

      Anyone else notice: They have ACTUAL phone numbers, the REAL ones. Google your own phone number some time to see about so-called meta-data.

      No mention of what the NSA had been doing - in violation of court orders (only a brief and casual mention of so-called accidental overstepping). I call BS on this one.

      I had hoped that 60 minutes would do an insightful - investigation into NSA. What I heard from so-called reporter John Miller was a PR fluff piece that one would expect as a former national spokesman for the FBI.

    7. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As important, even if Snowden was a scurrilous, devious shithead who cheated to get a job and stole that information for all the wrong reasons - as claimed in the interview - , that still in no way vindicates the actions of the NSA. Their methods were both morally and legally untenable and no matter the motives of the whistleblower, it is better that the citizens of the nation (and the world) are aware of the actions of the US government. It's the only way we can possibly hope to rein them in and prevent such abuses in the future. Even if that is a distant fantasy, it has a far greater probability of happening thanks to Snowden's actions. So no matter how the NSA - and the government at large - attempts to deflect the issue with attempts at character assassination, in the end we are still better off knowing their misdeeds.

    8. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What I find particularly worrying about those statements is that apparently no one else did either. Of everyone working at the NSA, no one did the right thing.
      If someone had, and reporting to the inspectors would actually yield something useful, they would definitely have mentioned it to further discredit Snowden. Why would they withhold the proof that their check & balances works? Because there is no proof, because it doesn't work.

      The only one who did the right thing, did so while making elaborate plans to escape the country, share the news with enough news agencies and reporters and pretty much all other things you find the good guys in movies doing when they fight the evil government.

    9. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the lesson is: the security apparutus NSA et al. has demonstrated its willingness to neutralize the threat posed by the democratic process to their autocratic organization. You only have to see the lack of punishment dealt out to the NSA Director fo rlying to the elected representivies of the people to get even a small glimpse into the power they wield over our so called "democracy".

    10. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Blowing the whistle only works when telling people that don't already know, and arguably aren't technically cleared to have such knowledge, as those that have clearance can't say anything even if they're told by a whistleblower, as it would spell an end to their clearance and probably their job, or in the case of an elected official, an end to their effectiveness at their job.

      I wonder, sometimes, how much less safe we'd really, actually be if the NSA or a like-organization didn't exist, or at least didn't get access to anything domestically without explicit court order. My guess is that it wouldn't be much, especially since for most cases of terrorism that have been launched from within the US (9/11, Tsasrnaev, Oklahoma City) have seemingly gone off without having triggered a response, especially considering that there was evidence of something being planned from the start that was brought to attention.

      I do not think that we are a whole lot safer on account of the NSA. As such, I don't think that the NSA's mission to collect information on Americans can even be justified by a safety argument.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    11. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here are possibilities more clearly laid out:
      1) the NSA did nothing wrong
      2) the NSA did something wrong, but no one noticed
      3) the NSA did something wrong, but no one reported it
      4) the NSA did something wrong and people reported it but nothing changed

      So which one is it, NSA? (1) is laughable, (2) and (3) put their workforce in bad light, and (4) justifies Snowden's approach.

    12. Re: Lie-fest from the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given that nothing has changed even after the leaks so far, I can't imagine that telling the IG would have done any good...

    13. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by conspirator57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Moreover, It's not like he hasn't had the observable precedent of what the government did to vocal dissenters using the "process," namely to maliciously prosecute them and strip them of their retirement even when prosecution fails for the obvious reason that there was no evidence. Thomas Drake is a prime example of that.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    14. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When someone asks the NSA the question, "Are you widely*collecting* information on millions of Americans?" and the answer given is that they "can only *target* Americans with a court order," then they are not answering the question that was asked. This is the way that they've been dodging this issue from the beginning, and I'm not sure that most people are noticing this.

      They should have been called on this. It was bad journalism.

    15. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They don't. They can't. So the surreptitious, illicit actions of a US spy agency can undermine the diplomatic work of months and years.

      For example, imagine what would happen if the spooks simply made up a story that a country had (and/or had recently used) weapons of mass destruction, and provided what appeared to be actionable intelligence to the politicians who were theoretically in charge. I mean, there's no way the wise politicians wouldn't see through that and overwhelmingly move to start a war over nothing, right?

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    16. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by JWW · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I love how a warrant awarded in secret with contents that are secret to collect data that will be kept secret is supposed to ok this type of behavior.

    17. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      ...John Miller was a PR fluff piece that one would expect as a former national spokesman for the FBI

      That's the real story here. The person who did the "reporting" has a clear conflict of interest. 60 Minutes used to be known for doing some hard hitting investigative journalism. My respect for 60 Minutes went down the toilet last night. It's not just John Miller who's the problem here. Clearly the management of CBS must know about his past work history - and they don't care. This is also the same organization that just mucked up their Benghazi reporting. 60 Minutes has gone from being a news program to be proud of to being a stain on the entire CBS network. CBS is turning into FOX with lipstick.

    18. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by ai4px · · Score: 4, Insightful
      What I love is that when a Snowden or an Assange comes along, they cue up the character assassinations. Why didnt you know Snowden's girlfriend was a stripper? That he made little ladies at the local bingo parlor say the F word by yelling BINGO at inappropriate times?

      It's to the point that I tend to believe a person is morally right as I hear more and more dirt on them.

    19. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by VortexCortex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I had hoped that 60 minutes would do an insightful - investigation into NSA. What I heard from so-called reporter John Miller was a PR fluff piece that one would expect as a former national spokesman for the FBI.

      It's perfectly in line with what famous linguist Noam Chomsky told us about the media decades ago. ABC and 60 minutes are some of the most blatantly bullshit of the mainstream media, rivaling Fox News. From airing things like "D is for Dad and Dumb" -- the weekend of father's day?, to writing hit-pieces about human rights websites claiming coordinated harassment of Anita Sarkeesian while ignoring her blatant confirmation bias and clear evidence of victim-farming con artistry, it's clear they do not present an objective or unbiased news source. It's also clear ABC are intentionally deceptive and seem to be harboring and furthering a sexist anti-male agenda.

      It's quite strange -- When I was younger I had assumed they were good; 60min was what grown-ups watched... right? It would be some kind of tin-foil-hatter conspiracy theory to think they weren't trustworthy news sources... right? Nope. Apparently Chomsky knew what he was talking about, and it applies now more than ever.

    20. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, precisely. And some smart people have also pointed out that they may have tried to do the exact same thing with Syria, since an apparent chemical weapons attack came shortly after Obama said that the use of chemical weapons would trigger a US military response.

      You get the impression at least some of these guys are the modern version of Vizzini from the Princess Bride: "I'm trying to start a war here! It's a prestigious line of work, with a long and glorious tradition."

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    21. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Right. The fact that they used the power of the state, specifically the justice dept. to go after people who had done nothing wrong is proof that they control that state power. This is the problem with secret access to secret information. Everything they have everything they do every conversation they have every access by everyone to every system at any time should be memorialized and subject to meaningful audit by truly independent citizens. It's the only way for us to both collect the information we need to protect ourselves and prevent the kind of abuse they meted out to Binney and Drake, which was the whole reason they produced a Snowden in the first place.

    22. Re: Lie-fest from the NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      September 11 happens every year.

    23. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by modecx · · Score: 3, Informative

      60 Minutes has a long list of journalistic fuckups, misrepresentations, poor research and intellectual dishonesty going back at least 30 years.

      I'm just surprised to see them so flagrantly sit at the right hand of the Ministry of Truthiness, as they did in this piece.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    24. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

      "Maybe he's too hamstrung or maybe he likes what the NSA is doing. Obama has in no way been clear enough for us to determine which one of those is true."

      The President isn't "hamstrung" at all. He's the Chief Executive, and the NSA is an Executive organization. The President can order an investigation at any time. He can send them all home for a paid (or even unpaid) vacation. Congress may write the laws, but the President is, in effect, the CEO. As long as he's not breaking Congress' (or any other) law, he can tell them to do what he pleases.

      There are LOTS of things the President can do. The simple fact that he has not tells us that he does not want to.

    25. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA by currently_awake · · Score: 2

      Tracking everything can't stop terrorism, they don't have the manpower to sift through it all. The purpose of tracking everything is so when something happens you can follow the trail back and get all the terrorists, not just the dead ones.

  12. Crocodile Tears by StoneyMahoney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not having access to 60-minutes in the UK, it would seem the main thrust of the NSA's argument is that the system has checks and balances for exactly this sort of situation, and that Snowden should have notified the right people about his findings rather than go public. What it doesn't seem to mention is that these very same people should already have known about this - everyone whose responsibility it was to either refrain from these actions or say "No" when someone else asked if they were allowed had already said "Yes" so I think removing the system's responsibility for self-regulation by public release in that context is exactly the right thing to do.

    By trying to paint Snowden's actions as irresponsible by failing to follow the preapproved script for this sort of violation, they are also trying to cover the arses of the self-regulators by claiming ignorance of the matter on their behalf. It's simultaneously a smear-attack on Snowden and an attempt to save the faces of the people he's made like utter f***wits. The logic-fail in this case is that they can't cover up what we already know from their own documents happened, so the ignorance play only makes the self-regulation argument even weaker as, prior to Snowden's releases, it had already comprehensively failed to protect those in it's charge over a long period of time.

    1. Re:Crocodile Tears by jbmartin6 · · Score: 2

      Snowden should have notified the right people about his findings rather than go public

      My reaction was that he did go to the right people. MY government has no right to keep secrets about what it is doing in regards to ME.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  13. Believability Deficit by StormReaver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So an organization whose existence is predicated on lying, and whose employees, from the top of the food chain to the bottom of the food chain, have done nothing but lie to their country, from the top of the food chain to the bottom of the food chain, goes on a national TV show and says stuff that we are supposed to believe?

    Either the NSA is staffed by utter morons, or they think we are the utter morons. There is a huge believability deficit in that agency, and an enormous cognitive disconnect among its leaders. It's yet another federal agency that needs a large funding reduction, and whose leaders need many years of therapy.

    1. Re:Believability Deficit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The 60-Minutes episode was not directed to you. The whole purpose was to "educate" the major part of the American people that are not certain what is going on but are absolutely sure that they need protection from the unknown enemy. After months of bad press, the NSA needed a well-scripted PR boost, and CBS was willing to give it to them.

      The sad truth is that a vast majority of the American people do not want to spend the time to analyze the raw data and come to their own conclusion. They want small, pre-digested sound-bites that they can post on Twitter and Facebook to make them feel like they have a handle on the situation. It's much easier to quote "Snowden is a bad terrorist" than it is to say "Snowden is very smart and likable, worked very hard to use his genius to advance security technology, and happened to feel very strongly that something was wrong in the NSA so he copied massive quantities of classified documents and sacrificed his career to reveal his findings."

      You're not the target audience of CBS, the lazy public is.

  14. Re:NSA Does Damage Control by TWiTfan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It always cracks me up when whsiteblowers are criticized for not contacting their superiors with the information first--as if it's not THOSE VERY SAME SUPERIORS who aren't the ones PERPETUATING THE WRONGDOING IN THE FIRST PLACE.

    "Sir I think this Adolph Hitler may be nuts!"

    "Well, then you must report this concern to Herr Hitler immediately!"

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  15. Re:Wonder why NSA didn't go to Fox network first ? by Yew2 · · Score: 2

    They probably figured it would be less 'obvious' if the so-called liberal media supported them instead of the 'obviously' biased Foxnooze.

    --
    will work for dragon quest localization
  16. A lot more truth than the imagination of outsiders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Nothing that has been revealed so far shows any wrongdoing. Hell, half the civil libertarians probably wanted to find something to impeach Obama with, that is there whole interest in this.

    Having a computer store metadata that you don't try to hide from private companiees just isn't that big of a deal. And it sure doesn't warrant one story a day from Slashdot...

  17. Cryptoanalysis? by rmsilva123 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Joslyn: So the idea here is we’re looking at a sequence of numbers, and we want to determine whether they’re random or not random.
    John Miller: How are you approaching that? Can you show me?
    Joe: We are looking at this data here and it is a bunch of random numbers on the screen.
    John Miller: That looks a tad overwhelming.
    Joe: It is."

    They are trying to determine if the numbers are random by looking at them on the screen? If this was how they were doing cryptoanalysis at the NSA, we could all sleep better. Of course, as noted above, there's no reason to believe any information provided in an obvious propaganda piece like this one.

  18. but where are the Golden Tablets? by jabberw0k · · Score: 2, Funny

    When working at home, Snowden covered his head and screen with a hood so that his girlfriend couldn't see what he was doing.

    Sounds like he was channeling Joseph Smith.

  19. Whoa ... an APOLOGIST !! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the balance of power/abuses, I'd still consider the NSA more appropriate than say... the Chinese/Russian equivalent ...

    Just look at the modus operandi of the apologists ...
     
    They are actually TRYING VERY HARD to compare an apple to an orange !

    RUSSIA and CHINA are NOT democratic countries.

    THEIR GOVERNMENTS are RUTHLESS and VERY AUTOCRATIC, and they have the power to PERSECUTE, and even EXECUTE their people WITHOUT REASON.

    I am from China. I know what I am talking about !

    On the other hand, the United States of America is supposed to be A DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY - where *LAWS* are obeyed, and even the government has to OBEY THE LAWS.

    NSA is NOT an apparatus of the Russian nor an apparatus of the Chinese government.

    NSA is a branch of the government of the United States of America.

    Which means, NSA has the OBLIGATION to operate ACCORDING TO WHAT HAS BEEN CLEARLY STATED IN THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    Has NSA done that ?

    Nope.

    NSA has VIOLATED the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA !

    Apologist, you are forewarned !

    We will hunt you down, no matter where the fuck you are !

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  20. Re:A lot more truth than the imagination of outsid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having a computer store metadata that you don't try to hide from private companiees just isn't that big of a deal.

    Actually many people do try to hide them from private companies. But even if this statement was entirely true, there is a big difference between what a corporation can do with the metadata vs what the government can do. Last time I checked, Google isn't able to send out a drone to extrajudicially kill a US citizen.

  21. CBS interviewer is an intelligence guy himself by DaveyJJ · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Regardless of CBS' political leanings, you'd have thought that the idea of CBS using John Miller, an ex-employee of the director of National Intelligence, and someone touted to be in the running for a top NYPD intelligence job, to be the interviewer would have stunk to high heaven. There was no criticism, no pushback and no attempt to suggest that the NSA has been doing anything wrong. Holy crickey ... did the NSA simply script this and hand it to CBS?

    --
    DaveyJJ
  22. His lips are moving by gmuslera · · Score: 2

    Clear signal that they are still lying. The director of the NSA had no problem nor consequences for lying to the congress, and Obama had no problem lying to the people multiple times. And you are trusting everything to people that intentionally is lying to you, and trying at all cost to catch the person that could inform you what the truth behind all those lies?

  23. Re:Up Next... by Desler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The LOVEINT scandal is one of the perfect examples of how that statement is patently bullshit. Unless they're going to claim that the FISA court is giving out LOVEINT warrants now.

  24. Re:Wonder why NSA didn't go to Fox network first ? by NatasRevol · · Score: 4, Informative

    Plus they got an utter insider to pretend to be a journalist.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Miller_(journalist)

    " He is the former Associate Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Analytic Transformation and Technology.[1] Prior to that, he was an Assistant Director of Public Affairs for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), where he was the bureau's national spokesman."

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  25. The Running Man by Grizzley9 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Sounds like they were taking a que from The Running Man script

    [Amber is being introduced to the audience as a special guest 'runner']
    Phil Hiton: ...Later, she cheated on College exams. Then she had sexual relations with three, sometimes even four men within a single year. Then came Mad Dog Ben Richards, her *Confederate*, her LOVER!
    Amber: That's a lie!
    Damon Killian: Let's reunite these two lovebirds!
    [audience cheers]
    Damon Killian: [Amber is sent down to the game zone]

    "

  26. Re:Wonder why NSA didn't go to Fox network first ? by poetmatt · · Score: 2

    Left and Right parties don't really exist in the USA. Both sides are basically moderate with some takes on eachother's side. It's a misnomer to think that they are any different than tea party or libertarians, either. Some people believe there's a divide, but when it comes to corporatism all sides are willing to sell out to the same sources.

    Any news source associated with the above will out tea party messages, it's just a question of how obfuscated. Is it that CBS re-broadcasts's faux news, or is it that they just quote some random person who quoted the original tea party person? This is not unheard of. see http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/10/1035294/-Creepy-15-Media-Outlets-Use-Exact-Same-Phrase for an example.

  27. Sponsored by Frankie70 · · Score: 4, Funny

    This episode of 60 minutes was brought to you by NSA

  28. Re:Wonder why NSA didn't go to Fox network first ? by StoneyMahoney · · Score: 4, Funny

    Strange bedfellows and all that. I bet there were some surreal scenes when the anti-NSA protest groups gathered, met their usual opposition, read each other's placards and banners, did a double take, then started checking their directions to make sure they were at the right protest. Hell, you want to really freak them out, get Tammy Baldwin and Sarah Palin on the same soapbox denouncing the NSA, it'll be the most ambivalent crowd in history.

    But seriously folks, between the UK and the US, I don't think there's one decent, credible politician with even the slightest scrap of meaningful power making themselves heard right now.

  29. Tell one lie and you lose credibility by tom229 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Snowden never approached any of multiple Inspectors General, supervisors, or Congressional oversight committee members about his concerns.

    Ya, because he'd rather spend the rest of his life a fugitive, essentially exiled from his home country and family under fear of rotting in solitary confinement in a military prison without charge. He'd rather do this than simply follow the perfectly effective checks and balances this completely innocent organization is government by.

    How stupid do they think we are?

    --
    If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  30. fixed 2006 link by globaljustin · · Score: 2

    sorry, here's the 2006 link:

    http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm

    From TFA:

    The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  31. Interesting admission of weakness by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

    NSA considered the possibility that Snowden left malicious software behind and removed every computer and cable that Snowden had access to from its classified network, costing tens of millions of dollars.

    The fact that they think such an attack could take place and that their best defense would be to take every piece of equipment that could be tainted and kill it with fire tells me that the NSA's IDS systems are extremely weak, its NIDS especially. I think this is the first bit of news that compromises security at the NSA, and they admitted it willingly. Sounds like the NSA is VASTLY better at attack than defense, which apparently consists of carefully screening everything that's allowed on their network (down to their TEMPEST-proof HQ) and then crossing their fingers.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  32. WTF should we *believe* the NSA? by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 2
    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
  33. Re:A lot more truth than the imagination of outsid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You have got to be kidding. NSA specifically targeted an American company and copied their inter-data-center traffic for surveillance purposes, thereby stealing the personal information and papers and effects of millions of US citizens. You try that and let me know how prison treats you -- it's prohibited from both a civil rights and constitutional standpoint. It's a criminal act.

  34. Seriously Impressed by PortHaven · · Score: 2

    Snowden has shown the incompetance of the NSA. Not only did he betray their trust and make off with millions of incriminating documents. He showed their entire selection process flawed and insecure apparently. If I got this straight, he hacked and stole their exame so that he could qualify for entrance into the NSA.

    Well if Snowden is just a stupid twit as the NSA likes to put forth, then anyone could of done this, and the NSA is in really sore shape.

  35. I know what you're trying to do by Xaedalus · · Score: 2

    And it won't matter (though I at least appreciate that you're calling out the false assumptions). Have you read through the commentary on this thread? There's no trust anymore. Just about everyone posting on this forum thread has lost trust in the US government, and ultimately, in each other. Each comment builds upon the paranoia of the previous, and I find myself wondering--what's the end result? A world without trust? If we can't trust our government, then we can't trust each other. And if we can't trust each other, what then? What kind of world is that, where we're so paranoid about corruption and about those in power that we don't allow anyone to be in power? That's not enlightened anarchy, that's the fall of civilization right there.

    --
    Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
    1. Re:I know what you're trying to do by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If we can't trust our government, then we can't trust each other.

      Oh really? I think you'll find that it's quite easy to trust the majority of our fellow human beings, those who haven't tried to set themselves up in a position of false authority, while simultaneously refusing to trust governments or other criminal organizations trying to rule over us.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    2. Re:I know what you're trying to do by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      If we can't trust our government, then we can't trust each other.

      Does not follow.

      I trust a lot of people. Not trusting the government doesn't make me trust any particular individual less (or more).

      Contrariwise, trusting the government doesn't make me trust any individual more (or less).

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  36. BIOS Attack? by ConallB · · Score: 5, Informative

    The BIOS attack mentioned in the article was really telling about how the spin machine works: To Quote:

    This is the BIOS system which starts most computers. The attack would have been disguised as a request for a software update. If the user agreed, the virus would’ve infected the computer.

    John Miller: So, this basically would have gone into the system that starts up the computer, runs the systems, tells it what to do.

    Debora Plunkett: That's right.

    John Miller: --and basically turned it into a cinderblock.

    Debora Plunkett: A brick.

    John Miller: And after that, there wouldn't be much you could do with that computer.

    Debora Plunkett: That's right. Think about the impact of that across the entire globe. It could literally take down the U.S. economy.

    First off, a BIOS attack? Really? Welcome to the 1980's!

    Secondly, Request for software update to attack BIOS? Have you tried to update your BIOS? It aint that easy and any bios made since the late 80's has safeguards to prevent BIOS updates in the way that's described.

    Thirdly, to brick enough computers to ruin the US economy using a bios update would be practically impossible. Never mind that such an attack would have to target people stupid enough to apply updates to systems in locked server rooms. Good luck with that!

    Finally, this whole article just demonstrated how they just don't 'get it'. They collect data on you and your loved ones but they don't "look" at it because "that" would be illegal. And if they get caught well then it's "their PR" which is bad, not their actions.

    And surely hacking the answers to cheat on a test to be a spy surely qualifies you for the job by default?

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    1. Re:BIOS Attack? by AndrewBuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What is even more funny (and telling) about the reporting on this is that the NSA people in the interview claimed the NSA stopped this attack and then CBS reported that directly with no question about whether this was legitamate or not. They claim this would have bricked all the computers, which presumably includes the one I am typing this message on. So we are just told they stopped the attack... how.

      Seriously, how the fuck did they do that?

      They claim China wrote some super virus that could brick the bios on a PC and they stopped it. Really? Did they run some bios update on my computer to defend it against this malicious update, because I don't seem to recall taking such defensive measures myself. Or maybe they stopped the virus from propagating around the internet in the first place and therefore protected me from ever seeing the virus in the first place. That must be how they did it, I guess that would explain why the hundreds of antivirus companies never seemed to mention that a world ending virus is a thing that we should all be worried about and maybe, you know, buy some antivirus software from them to defend against.

      It also begs the question, if they can stop this virus in such a fashion, why couldn't they stop any other attack in a similar fashion. And then why, not 10 minutes later in the interview, does the head of US cyber command claim we are vulnerable to cyber attack (and therefore the NSA is totally justified in doing all this spying and oh by the way they sure could use a bigger budget).

      To call this reporting is just laughable. It's not reporting, it is propaganda, and not even good propaganda. Wow, you stopped a world ending virus, gee thanks NSA. Golly gee willickers I sure am glad you saved us all. Tell me some more about how awesome you all are. Give me a fucking break.

      -AndrewBuck

  37. I know it's counter intuitive by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but privacy is the culprit here. The NSA can go rogue because they have way too much privacy of a certain type, the "it never happened" type privacy, not the "no one knows what we are now talking about " privacy.

    They can plan and plot in a dark so dark no one can ever know what was said. That has to go. Every single they do, speak, write , everywhere they go, every access to every computer system anyone there ever avails themselves of has to be memorialized into an incorruptible audit trail which can "replayed" and otherwise analyzed by investigative authorities given the proper authorization to do so.

    To start with the premise that "we don't need this surveillance" is to concede the argument before it's even begun.

    You can't win an argument starting with a false picture of reality. We DO need this level of surveillance. We DO need these systems and we will need them even more going forward. That is a highly unpleasant fact about reality. We need new thinking here.

    So how do we stop an agency with that much assymetrical information from leveraging it into domestic political or global economic power and thus consuming on the one had our democracy and on the other our legitimacy as a world power?

    The answer is to make it impossible to abuse the system AND ALSO get away with it, both.

    The people in charge there now need to be moved out. People like Binney and Drake and Snowden - all true patriots- who KNOW how this technology can and is abused need to be put into positions of power. The old guard would never ever permit that , even to the point of staging a coup d'tat . Obama needs his own, legitimate, Sunday Night Massacre (Nixon 1973) there and he needs to move all at once and very suddenly with a clear vision of how that agency is going to be going forward.

    Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. We need the NSA and what it does. We need more of the same from the NSA in fact. But we need the contingency of ironclad transparency into the organization also.

    If you take the long view, it was predictable even obvious that the individuals who "came of age" in the NSA during the digital revolution would attempt to leverage their newly invented and secret powers into an position of untouchability and engage in lawlessness. These guys have a god complex the size of a mountain, and they can have and will continue to demonize, including in their own minds, anyone who opposes their personal vision of what their careers and lives are all about, what their mission is and the best way to achieve that mission.

    No point in picking their psychology apart, the point is they need to be relieved of duty and also we need to implement totalitarian-level of accounting within the organization that any lawbreaker will fear, even as we continue to spy as we have been, pushing the technological limits of what can be uncovered on our very real enemies.

  38. The Threat Narrative Goes Both Ways by VortexCortex · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So he broke into a secure environment, serruptitiously obtained confidential and/or classified information, and used his take to successfully gain a competive advantage over his peers? And somehow this makes him unsuitable for employment at the NSA?

    I guess it's a good thing he wasn't a state sponsored spy... I mean, just imagine what would happen if there were multiple powerful nations with "cyber armies" that wanted at that data and the gall to infiltrate and spy on the USA / NSA. Why, all that data would just be ripe for the taking, like a huge single point of failure. The NSA would be a huge threat to national security. I mean, wow, Snowden was a contractor; Just imagine if he had been a really bad guy trained in computer exploitation and given a big budget to buy any zero-day exploit on the black market he needed? Wow, scary stuff NSA. I guess they'll be shutting down now that the biggest threat to national security has been identified as the NSA itself... right?

  39. Re:criticized for missing Boston bombing by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

    Yes, the public is dumb. However, the NSA had their secret rooms in telco-buildings slurping up the data for decades, Omnivore, Carnivore, ECHELON, Five-eyes, etc. Google it. the PATRIOT Act retroactively granted immunity to the ISPs for their assistance in breaking the 4th amendment prior to 9/11.... Ahem... prior to 9/11. So, they had decades of warrantless wiretapping and failed to prevent 9/11, then we gave them carte blanche spying capability and they failed to prevent the Boston Marathon bombing. Hell, the spying has failed to prevent every terrorist attack since it's been in place in the 60's. It's expensive and useless, and should be routed out. I mean, you're four times more likely to get hit by lightning. Four hundred times more folks die from accidents and heart disease than a 9/11 scale attack, every year. NSA budget should be 1/400th of what we spend on these threats. The terrorist threat is just the new bogieman now that we have cowed the large adversarial nations via mutually assured destruction.

    Yes, the public is dumb as rocks for believing the exaggerated threats and scaremongering. We're wasting so much in maintaining and expanding the police state and military industrial complex, trillions on pointless wars on false pretenses, hundreds of thousands of civilians killed in retaliation for a few thousand, ugh. Atrocious. The media won't report on what's coming down the pike. Not like we haven't seen it play out before. The USSR over extended itself the same way. Now the cold war is against the very people themselves, it can never just end on its own. One day you'll wake up and the dollar will suddenly be utterly destroyed, taking "news" agencies by surprise. There will be economic chaos. The people have lost their power over Washington and the Corporations are next on the chopping block -- all according to plan. Anyone can see it coming a mile away; Like what happened to Chile in the 1970's. Eisenhower tried to warn us of everything that's come to pass. You'd have to be a fool to think it wasn't going down this way on purpose.

    It's too bad the public are morons. We can't trust anything the NSA says now that they've lied to congress. Since we've allowed such secrecy and corruption we can't even prove whether a terrorist attack is real or not. I mean, it's not like military strategists who need a disaster to polarize the people wouldn't set up bait too good to ignore and sacrifice Americans by letting it happen -- Like in Perl Harbor, etc. You really believe strategists were inept enough to leave that many ships in that tight of a space... or that US air superiority couldn't handle protecting at least the Pentagon on 9/11? Not like we didn't have jets on notice 24/7 that we can scramble at a moment's notice...

    Plausible deniability does not eliminate undeniable plausibility.

  40. Re:Data storage per unit volume in Utah by MooseTick · · Score: 2

    "How many acres of hard drives would it take to store everyone's cellphone conversations?"

    That can be answered with a few assumptions and some basic math.

    First, let's say "everyone" consists of all US citizens. Let's say there are 320M citizens in the US. Let's add another 30 million tourists and/or illegal aliens bringing the total to 350M.

    Now let's say everyone talks to each other 1 hour per day on average. That would total 175M hours of conversation to record per day, or 10,500,000,000 minutes. MP3 can easily store about 1Mb/minute. Therefore, it would take about 10,500Mb or 10Pb per day to store every conversation for a day. That would mean you need ~ 3650Pb to store a year's worth of conversations. That could be stored on about 1M 4 TB drives. If you can get them for $200 a pop, that could be bought for about $200M plus the hardware to park them in. I suspect you could do this where it's searchable, raided, and usable for well under $400M and store it all in a medium sized facility. It would take about 4000 racks to store it all, but that could be a 62x62 configuration. To answer the original question, this could all be stored on a single acre.

    In reality, you would need a lot less space. Everyone doesn't have a phone. Everyone doesn't talk on the phone for an hour. I suspect the average is 1/10 of that. I'm doing good to talk an hour a month.

  41. Re:Lie-fest from the NSA, geek code to the rescue by TheRealHocusLocus · · Score: 2

    You forgot these possibilities:

    WE ALL forgot to do what any rational Slashdot audience would do, abandon thread for a moment to set up a Boolean decision tree and NSA morality geek code so that further discussion becomes logically precise, generally incomprehensible to outsiders and confusing in whole new ways.. so from this little sub-thread so far we have

    Prefix: NSASnowJob:
    thouHastSinned+-: Did the NSA do something wrong?
    IseeSaidTheBlindMan+-: Did anyone notice?
    deweyDefeatsTruman+-: Did anyone report it?
    whoIsJohnGalt+-: Did anything change?
    area51+-: Did someone make shit up?
    texasSuicide+-: Did someone die mysteriously?
    itWasTheDogThatFarted+-: Does everyone do it (no big fucking deal)?

    [[NSA:SnowJob::]] We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare [thouHastSinned+++] We shall endeavor in spite of this to keep the United States of America neutral. [IseeSaidTheBlindMan++++] In the event of this not succeeding, we make Mexico a proposal of alliance on the following basis: [deweyDefeatsTruman++] make war together [whoIsJohnGalt++++] make peace together [Snoden=texasSuicide----] You will inform the President of the above most secretly as soon as the outbreak of war with the United States of America is certain [no excuse itWasTheDogThatFarted--] and add the suggestion that he should, on his own initiative, invite Japan to immediate adherence and at the same time mediate between Japan and ourselves. [credibility zero area51----] Signed, ZIMMERMANN.

    --
    <blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>