Slashdot Mirror
Schneier: Break Up the NSA
New submitter BrianPRabbit writes "Bruce Schneier proposes 'breaking up' the NSA. He suggests assigning the targeted hardware/software surveillance of enemy operations to U.S. Cyber Command. Further, the NSA's surveillance of Americans needs to be scaled back and placed under the control of the FBI. Finally, he says, is 'the deliberate sabotaging of security. The primary example we have of this is the NSA's BULLRUN program, which tries to "insert vulnerabilities into commercial encryption systems, IT systems, networks and endpoint communication devices." This is the worst of the NSA's excesses, because it destroys our trust in the Internet, weakens the security all of us rely on and makes us more vulnerable to attackers worldwide. .... [T]he remainder of the NSA needs to be rebalanced so COMSEC (communications security) has priority over SIGINT (signals intelligence). Instead of working to deliberately weaken security for everyone, the NSA should work to improve security for everyone.'"
Bruce Schneier can break the NSA
the FBI is a federal police force, not a spy agency that collects intelligence
Security expert Bruce Schneier was found dead in his home. The cause of death is unknown but police are investigating possible foul play.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
That is, I think it would be more likely to corrupt the FBI than to clean up the NSA's investigation of Americans.
The real problem is priorities more than anything else.
The events of September 11th panicked us Americans, and we decided to overspend and over-allow security.
We need to realize that the number of terrorism related attacks are relatively SMALL and to cut funding for all things that invade our privacy - starting with the TSA.
When you limit their funds, they spend their money wisely on clear and present dangers.
When you give them unlimited funding, as we have been doing, they spend it on any wild-ass crazy possibility, which means they investigate people and cases that are clearly and obviously not terrorism related.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
FBI dropped "law enforcement" as one of their primary duties not long ago. They consider themselves a national security organ now:
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/01/05/fbi_drops_law_enforcement_as_primary_mission
CyberCommand, a command I'm very familiar with as prior-Air Force, doesn't have a reason to take over what the NSA does. The author of this article really doesn't know what he's talking about.
> That is, I think it would be more likely to corrupt the FBI than to clean up the NSA's investigation of
> Americans.
Corrupt the FBI? The FBI are as incorruptible as the proverbial satan. We are talking about the people who have so precious little to really do that they go around creating criminals to arrest. These are the people who go after little shit online troublemakers and find mentally unstable people who they can shove a bomb in the hands of.
Corrupt them?
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Well, let's elaborate, shall we. I think the number of possible satisfactory solutions to the NSA problem are infinite. This plan, like every other one that would work all fall on unshakable premise. Congress needs to pass legislation removing previously granted powers(then do something else, apparently, to mollify those who are actually scared of terrorists, in this case move those powers to law enforcement).
This one premise, though, has shown zero chance of happening. Those in congress critical of the NSA's behavior mostly seem interested in using it as an attack chip for the republican party in the next couple elections, and so leaving the power in the executive plays to their needs. The executive, for their part, have either bought, or are willing to attempt to sell, the pragmatism line, and the laws passed by congress say it's legal, so they don't see a need to change anything by fiat.
> This one premise, though, has shown zero chance of happening. Those in congress critical of the NSA's behavior mostly seem interested in using it as an attack chip for the republican party in the next couple elections, and so leaving the power in the executive plays to their needs.
I would support Beta 100% if they gave me the ability to moderate posts "+1 Depressing".
-Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
DO NOT break up the NSA. Do away with it and replace it with nothing. The CIA too.
For those of you treasonous traitors that like to yell "national security" to cover up for your crimes, consider this: Before the CIA and NSA were founded, the US was 8-0 in war. Since those organizations were founded, the US is 0-5 in war.
You treasonous traitors that like the NSA and CIA (I'm looking at you cold fjord) are the national security risks.
Not really. Modern justice is one of those concepts that came about as a way to stop the cycles of violence fed by vigilante justice. As such it needs to be violent and ugly enough to sate the victim's desire for revenge well enough that they don't feel the need to take things into their own hands. At the extreme, why do you suppose executions are so brutal? We know perfectly well how to kill people completely painlessly - a gas chamber filled with pure nitrogen will knock somebody unconscious in under a minute, usually without them ever noticing anything is wrong (we're not wired to detect oxygen deprivation), and they'll be dead a few minutes later. But somebody dieing peacefully in their sleep doesn't provide any catharsis for the victims. So we use techniques that induce plenty of twitching and whimpering to sate our bloodthirsty consciences.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
The NSA does not necessarily want you to be insecure. As a matter of fact, I have downloaded documents from their web site with tips on how to configure my OSes to be more secure (and I don't recall any of the tips requiring me to install any additional software, which definitely would have raised a red flag). It is in the best interest of the NSA that the computers that protect sensitive data in all public and private sectors be secure from outside threats. With that said, it is also in the NSA's interest to be able to access as much data from these same machines as they can possibly gather. Therefore, they walk a tight line where it's best when everyone's security is loose enough that the NSA can get in, but tight enough to keep less sophisticated groups out. Based on systems such as BULLRUN, it seems that the NSA has become more concerned with gaining access for themselves over encouraging tight security.
But think of how awkward it would be when the N runs into S or A at the spy conventions. They'd reminisce about the old times of spying on millions of Americans. They'd probably laugh about some guy on deviantart drawing naked women and crying while masturbating. Then N would be like "So, you guys want to get out of here" and the A would be like "N, look, we can't. S and I have a good thing going, you're just too crazy for us, lets just be friends," and N would be like "Sure yeah, no you're right, it's cool." But it won't be cool. N will finish his drink and then leave, all three of them will feel bad. A and S will go home and start getting intimate, but S won't be able to get it up, thinking about how bad N must feel.
You really want to do that to N, S, and A?
Which is really sad since the concept of rehabilitation was really pioneered by American groups, but then the people who helped start the movement were generally voted out of office in favor of 'make them suffer' candidates. So now other countries have learned from what we were doing AND observed the negative impact of moving away from that model and thus produced systems that, from an actual 'reducing crime' perspective are much more effective but which have less emotional satisfaction to them.
Which of course becomes a vicious cycle since an ineffective justice system results in more crime, which means more political pressure to make things worse from victims and scared people.
Congress needs to pass legislation removing previously granted powers(then do something else, apparently, to mollify those who are actually scared of terrorists, in this case move those powers to law enforcement).
So to use your terms, Congress needs to pass something to mollify the people scared of NSA?
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
I just love the thought of the FSB, Mossad, MI5, and just about every other foreign intelligence network on Earth (and those are merely the legal ones) running rampant throughout our country and society without the CIA to check them. Gosh, that'd be so much fun to just lower our guard and take punches! Oh hey, maybe those other nations would be so friendly towards us once we dismantled our intelligence apparatus that they'd willingly leave us alone! And forswear corporate espionage to boot! Dismantle the NSA, yes. Spread it out amongst the other agencies, yes. But don't disarm us completely. The CIA has screwed up a lot, so has the FBI--but they're still good ideas to have in place. We as a society have to reassume the responsibility, and the maturity of overseeing the operations of those two agencies on an appropriate basis.
Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
None, until and unless the damage from terrorist attacks exceeds the damage from panicked overreaction to terrorist attacks.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Think Terrance Yeakey, Michael Hastings, Ken Saro Wiwa...
http://www.okcbombing.net/News...
http://nymag.com/news/features...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I could put a MUCH longer list here, but if ppl REALLY cared something
would have been done years ago...
We like to whine, but that is about it.
In the meantime Orwell's nightmare is on schedule.
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"