Slashdot Mirror


How the NSA Plans To Infect 'Millions' of Computers With Malware

Advocatus Diaboli sends news from The Intercept about leaked documents which show that the NSA is significantly expanding its efforts to build an automated system to compromise computers remotely. From the article: "The implants being deployed were once reserved for a few hundred hard-to-reach targets, whose communications could not be monitored through traditional wiretaps. But the documents analyzed by The Intercept show how the NSA has aggressively accelerated its hacking initiatives in the past decade by computerizing some processes previously handled by humans. The automated system – codenamed TURBINE – is designed to 'allow the current implant network to scale to large size (millions of implants) by creating a system that does automated control implants by groups instead of individually.' In a top-secret presentation, dated August 2009, the NSA describes a pre-programmed part of the covert infrastructure called the 'Expert System,' which is designed to operate 'like the brain.' The system manages the applications and functions of the implants and 'decides' what tools they need to best extract data from infected machines."

234 comments

  1. crime? by BlazingATrail · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Shouldn't somebody go to jail for this?

    1. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hah. The elite get in trouble for doing something illegal? Was that a joke?

      However, since you pointed out their wrong-doing, you have a chance of being locked up. There is no greater law in these lands than embarrassing or exposing those in power.

    2. Re:crime? by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      Only if they actually do it, and only if someone with authority ends up considering it illegal.

    3. Re:crime? by AndrewOsiris · · Score: 1

      conspiracy is a crime. Planning a bank robery is a crime.

    4. Re:crime? by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm pretty sure Snowden will, at some point in the future.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    5. Re:crime? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately, the people most likely to go to jail for this are the people who are letting us know about these abuses of power instead of the people abusing power. The latter will simply cry "TERRORISTS!" at the next Congressional hearing and get (at worst) a sternly worded speech directed at them.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    6. Re:crime? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Informative

      to send someone to jail, you have to take them to court (part of the process).

      and there is the problem: you and I can't show 'standing' (it will always, ALWAYS be denied us and we can't prove we have been tapped, so there you go!).

      therefore, they are untouchable via usual legal means.

      they know the system and they use it to keep themselves in power.

      nothing short of a full revolution is going to unseat, them either. and given americans' apathy and blind trust in continually voting against their own best interests, this won't be solved in our lifetime.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    7. Re: crime? by macinnisrr · · Score: 1

      I take it you've never heard of Guantanamo.

    8. Re:crime? by hackus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Jail?

      Oh, I am sorry...you are thinking of JUSTICE. No no...laws apply to YOU..thats JUST US.

      JUSTICE is for anybody not you, and it works this way:

      1) Eric Holder runs guns for the mexican cartels in a act of subverting the law of the land, the constitution by orchestrating heavy arms into very violent people on the Mexican border hoping the chaos that will inevitably follow through with the subversion of law abiding citizens right to bear arms.

      You know, because, if you have border incidents, they don't want people able to defend themselves.

      While this is going on, DHS is plotting to kill every man women and child in the USA through the acquisition of ludicrous amounts of ammo.

      HOLLOW POINT BULLETS AND SNIPER AMMO, not pistol ammo. MILITARY GRADE AMMO.

      I mean, ammo in the BILLIONS OF ROUNDS. You would need hundreds of MILLIONS of terrorists to justify that sort of purchase.

      Do I need to draw anyone a picture or is it just a coincidence that the population of the USA is about 280 Million?

      280 Million terrorists.

      Yeah, terrorists because you don't like having your money confiscated when the banker cronies come and take it all.

      2) Look at these lawless people and the BANKS THAT SUPPORT THEM.

      New data centers that are funded for criminal industrial espionage, which is the primary activity of the NSA, with PRINTED dollars, because the economy could never afford to build any of this stuff.

      From the NSA data centers to the really outrageous F35 program, which cost about 2 trillion to maintain a world wide fighter force of F35's when fully deployed.
      (Probably more and if they can ever deliver it because they can't get the thing to work.)

      Does anyone know what we collect in taxes? It's about 2 trillion. No really, go look it up. ALL of the collected tax revenue for one year, would go JUST for maintaining a fleet of F35's world wide on all of those bases we have.

      Meanwhile these BANKERS print money and destroy the dollar value and as a result creates mischief. If you spend 2 trillion on air planes, you logically have to print the rest of the money to pay for everything else.

      The SAME MISCHIEF THAT IS GOING ON IN THE UKRAINE right now. Did you see who they hired?

      A Banker. A nice London Banker!

      These people are everywhere and where they go lawlessness follows.

      3) Have you noticed our youth have no where to go? You know why? Well, for one thing the economy is totally managed by the federal reserve.

      The whole thing is rigged. LIBOR. Rigged. Silver Gold Prices, Rigged. Stock Market...

      RIIIIIIIIGGGGGGEEEEEEEDD!

      You tell me how the stock market can be so high when there is virtually no growth ANWYHERE IN THE WORLD, let alone the United States, which has like 35% unemployment.

      You know once upon a time we had laws in place so Bankers couldn't control everything through monopolies. We use to have like a huge number of banks in the USA. Laws were put there so that the banks could not combine and do a EPIC meltdown, or forge any mischief. What do we have now?

      5 banks controlling like 85% of the market? What happens when one of them goes titsup?

      Yeah, remember the Anti Trust laws? Remember the glass steagall laws?

      Yeah they got rid of them. You know why?

      Because they want to steal it ALL that is why, and they don't want to be held accountable for ANYTHING.

      Justice is for JUST US, NOT THEM.

      I am not even going to go into OBAMA CARE, because at this point I am really freaking ticked off at all of this banker mishief and the hollowed politicians from our so called TWO PARTY, really ONE PARTY system.

      ONE PARTY to SCREW YOU.

      Two Party so they can laughably claim you have a choice when you vote.

      --
      Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    9. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People aren't even willing to vote to make it become a crime, and you want people to act as though it were? People have been bitching about CALEA for two decades but you would never guess anyone has a problem, looking at every single goddamn election. Oh, you disagree? Ok, tell me the name of any politician who lost an election due to their pro-police state stand. Or tell me the name of one who won, running on promises of getting the lawbreakers out of government, expanding the peoples' power at the expense of the government's power, or repealing police state laws?

      Voters don't care. So nobody has incentive to arrest anyone. If someone does, we the people will punish them at the polls.

    10. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SEVERAL people should go to jail for this

    11. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly....

      They are already revising their anti-embarassment law-*cough* I mean "whistleblower protection" laws.

      Not only do they completely disregard the actual law and break it..... it's now "National Security" the second someone spots this illegal wrongdoing. Why? Because everyone would be so outraged that they might actually revort or cause a riot......

      So somehow that translates to "keep doing illegal shit behind the peoples' backs" these days.... Not "stop doing illegal shit and jail those involved" like it used to. Now it's National Security.... I.e. fuck you.

    12. Re:crime? by davester666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      also, not sure why the article is using the future tense, as this relating to plans the NSA made in 2009. I find it hard to believe they haven't been implemented yet.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    13. Re:crime? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Armed insurrection is our only option at this point. We need to form something like the "Molly Maguires": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...

      It's not mentioned in the article, but they used to lop off the heads of mine managers who were exploiting destitute immigrant miners in the late 1800's. The Maguires obviously couldn't strike back at the Robber Barons who owned the mines, so they attacked the henchmen of the Robber Barons. They would drop the heads off on the doorsteps of other ruthless mine managers to give them a message. My high school history teacher attended a funeral in Eastern Pennsylvania, and the funeral parlor manager said that they still had some unidentified heads in jars in the basement.

      So post the names of NSA employees publicly, and let's start collecting heads. The NSA is an enemy of the United States of America now, and all the values of the Founding Fathers. The system of checks and balances has been destroyed by a rogue branch of the US government.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    14. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even though you looked like a troll at first..... that was a really well put post.

      Thank you. For affirming I'm not the only one who sees a few things going on right now.

    15. Re:crime? by wasteoid · · Score: 1

      Shut it down!

      Seriously, until the masses/sheeple/sleepers are awakened, nothing will change.

    16. Re:crime? by hackus · · Score: 1

      The whole NSA mischief is directly related to what the banks are doing.

      The banks fund all of this stuff, or it is funded through black projects, through illegal means because they do this sort of thing to avoid the laws put in place by the GAO.

      It isn't off topic, it is bulls eye on topic. Look if you can print money you can fund just about anything, and most of what is happening is very very BAD.

      I didn't pay much attention when these bankers started invading Mali because they have a huge infestation of GOLD...I mean..."terrorists" and France couldn't give Germany its gold back.

      Russia is not a nation of camel loving goat herders. These people have Nuclear weapons and these bankers are stirring up trouble.

      Leave them ALONE!

      The whole NSA thing is just a symtom of a much larger problem. Oceans of money being printed by very bad people to do very bad things.

      If they are not stopped, they are going to destroy our currency, our banks EVERYTHING.

      --
      Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    17. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't somebody go to jail for this?

      Under what law?

      If they never applied these to US Citizens (other than the phone metadata issue which appears to be the only case), what law are they breaking? Possibly a treaty with a foreign nation, but that is a legal quagmire. What US law are they breaking, especially considering that the NSA has been explicitly given the power to do this by the US Congress?

    18. Re:crime? by ImprovOmega · · Score: 1

      Okay, generally insightful and well put. But I need to point out that the Hague Convention prohibits hollow point bullets in warfare and as such they are certainly not military rounds. Also, vastly more rounds of ammo are expended in practice, training, and re-certification exams than will ever be shot at live targets. I would be surprised if DHS and all its agents used less than a billion rounds of ammo a year - 99+% of which would be shot at paper targets.

    19. Re:crime? by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, perhaps we should make bitcoin mining illegal, then perhaps there would be less initiative behind creating zombie army's of bot nets capable of such serious hash rates. It has really never been about the security of Americans, it is about money, and their own security within secrecy, it is about defeating the security of Americans, and leaving Americans pants around their ankles when it comes down to it. So the truth of it is upside down, what next? No one will ever be prosecuted for these actions, aside from the potential of inciting revolution.

    20. Re:crime? by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 2

      So post the names of NSA employees publicly, and let's start collecting heads.

      Why bother with the hassle, effort and expense. The best way to deal with the NSA is to cut their ludacrious budget. Then watch the outrageous sci-fi super surveillance software projects subsequently implode.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    21. Re:crime? by antdude · · Score: 1

      What about the independent parties?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    22. Re:crime? by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

      Crime? Yes.
      Jail -- No. For this, you'll need trees and hemp.

    23. Re:crime? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Hah. The elite get in trouble for doing something illegal? Was that a joke?

      However, since you pointed out their wrong-doing, you have a chance of being locked up. There is no greater law in these lands than embarrassing or exposing those in power.

      The person who has been in charge of the NSA for over five years is one Barack H Obama.

      Is he the elite you had in mind?

    24. Re:crime? by cavreader · · Score: 0

      Good idea but only if you defund every state intelligence gathering agency on the planet at the same time. Unless you believe if the US stopped spying all the other countries would just close up shop as well. Until people are ready to admit that the US is by far not the only country that conducts clandestine intelligence gathering operations the NSA and CIA are not going away. And it is not a matter of excusing NSA actions just because others do the same damn thing. It is about putting this entire issue into it's proper context. Without the context there is no way you can intelligently assess a problem before you start making suggestions on how to correct the problem. So hold the government accountable for the domestic programs but the foreign programs are exactly what the state intelligence gathering agencies are supposed to be doing. A state has no "friends" only interests and any so called "friends" or allies are not exempt from the NSA or CIA programs. The US constitution and bill of rights protections are not applicable outside of the US.

    25. Re:crime? by guises · · Score: 1

      Oh for gods' sake, it's Keith Alexander. Any idiot can look that up. Where did this idea come from that the president is lord of all things governmental?

    26. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't somebody go to jail for this?

      No. This is a legitimate function of an intelligence service. I am American and support this.

    27. Re:crime? by timkofu · · Score: 1

      +1

    28. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not even going to go into OBAMA CARE, because at this point I am really freaking ticked off at all of this banker mishief and the hollowed politicians from our so called TWO PARTY, really ONE PARTY system.

      Well, it is actually a rather interesting demonstration of the split party syndrome: Republicans have been firmly against "Obamacare" and fighting it all they could once it has been adopted basically unchanged from Massachusetts and retitled from "Romneycare".

      It's really just a show for making the impression of opposition.

    29. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think you can bump the ultimate responsibility that easily down*, what makes you think that that Keith fellow actually has a grip and/or knowledge of what the people below him do ?

      *People in power should have their oversight mechanisms in working order. If not, they are responsible for the failure of doing so (including all the negative results stemming from that failure ofcourse).

    30. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't somebody go to jail for this?

      I can see certain groups getting well pissed with this , It is high time the NSA were knocked down a few dozen pegs just who the Feck do they think they are .
      If anything is going to start a war self centred biggoted bastards like the NSA are prime candidates .

      They need terminating with malice ..

      PG ..

    31. Re:crime? by guises · · Score: 2

      I'm not bumping responsibility down, I'm just not bumping it up. I'm not claiming that Keith Alexander is lord of the NSA any more than Obama is, and I certainly don't want him to be held responsible for everything that the NSA does either. That's just another cop-out. I would like Keith Alexander to be held responsible for the decisions that he makes and the responsibilities that fall to him and no more than that.

      I know there's this idea that a good leader should take responsibility for everything that their underlings do, but this is just a way of circumventing justice. The underlings commit all manner of crimes, the guy at the top says "I'm in charge, I take responsibility." and it all goes away.

      I'll grant that there are a lot of situations where pushing the responsibility down can be just as bad or worse than pushing it up, but so what? All that's illustrating is that this sort of thing is complicated. Figuring out just who it is who has committed a crime is often not an easy or simple thing to do.

    32. Re:crime? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      Oh for gods' sake, it's Keith Alexander. Any idiot can look that up. Where did this idea come from that the president is lord of all things governmental?

      The NSA is a federal agency. The president is ultimately responsible.

      That's why we even have elected officials ... if they can't be held accountable for their governance, then why bother?

      I'm just tired of hearing people rant against what they voted for.

    33. Re:crime? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      I would like Keith Alexander to be held responsible for the decisions that he makes and the responsibilities that fall to him and no more than that.

      Responsibilities such as selecting and retaining the people who work under him?

    34. Re:crime? by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      Why? Just because they have the ability to infect millions of computers, doesn't mean they have...or more importantly, don't so illegally. For example, it would be completely legal for them to do this to computers located in Russia.

      Of course this is /., so the assumption is ALWAYS that the tech the NSA has is being used illegally.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    35. Re:crime? by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      Crime? Yes.
      Jail -- No. For this, you'll need trees and hemp.

      One to hug and the other to smoke?

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    36. Re:crime? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Keith Alexander is not an elected official. The lowest-ranking elected official that commands the NSA is Obama. Seriously.

      This doesn't mean that Obama should be blamed for everything Alexander and the NSA do. It means that he needs to establish acceptable limits for the NSA and find somebody who's likely to keep the NSA in those limits. So far, I haven't seen an indication that he's willing to do anything about NSA wrongdoing.

      This is nothing new, but neither is my displeasure with elected officials for various things.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    37. Re:crime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot Reagan "union-busting" and "neat" covert ops too...

      So in addition to Eric Holder, please include all Reagan-Bush Senior/Junior National Security, Justice, Defense and Treasury Department officials...

      "SOME" Liberals may have been co-opted (Kennedy's for example; others include Cuomo, DNC, etc.) but it didn't start with the liberals. I will guarantee you that.

    38. Re:crime? by TechnoJoe · · Score: 0

      Armed insurrection is our only option at this point.

      No, there is one last civil, non-violent option -- a convention of the states. Georgia has already passed a resolution calling for a convention. The Convention of the States group expects to have 16 by the end of this year.

    39. Re:crime? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      Modding me down is so much easier than admitting you made a mistake.

    40. Re:crime? by guises · · Score: 1

      So far, I haven't seen an indication that he's willing to do anything about NSA wrongdoing.

      Well, Keith Alexander is getting the boot and there's a new nominee, Michael Rogers. That's something happening this month, though I don't know if it's Obama's doing or if Keith just decided to leave.

    41. Re:crime? by spectrumlogic · · Score: 1

      Ask yourself...how does this post get moderated to "5 - Insightful" ??? No offense intended and in the most respectful way I know how to say this...but this person (or bot) appears to be exhibiting pathological levels of anxiety...practically slobbering on his/her (damn sure don't want to be sexist) keyboard...yet the community appears to identify with the underlying theme of vague fear projected in this example toward various "power figures". In the larger thread...are calls for armed insurrection, planning for counter-measures, angst over children's toys, and a smattering of "they're coming to get you" warnings...over a total of 227 postings (12 hours after the daily e-mail feed)...so yes...the numbers seem to be falling (our attention span is so short) and /. has become a honey hole for seditious rambling...is that still a crime? ...or is that being handled a different way now? The point being...isn't the real issue (at this point) to the "3 letter guys" really about the effect on the "caged populace" ? I submit it is...so to all the reasoned folk out there who might be tempted to lose interest...keep your filters up...do not turn away...the wheels turn slowly.

  2. Skynet? by Traze · · Score: 0

    Is there any way to avoid such a thing short of cutting my net connection?

    Generally I am not too worried about the NSA. I think it is BS what they do as far as invasion of privacy. But I personally have nothing to hide.

    But this has completely changed the small amount of reluctance I had in becoming a "ZOMG da sky iz fallinz!" type.

    Burn these fuckers.

    1. Re:Skynet? by BrianPRabbit · · Score: 5, Informative

      But I personally have nothing to hide.

      Even if You are completely innocent, You have "something to hide". So agree both a defense Attorney and a law enforcement Officer as well as every other law enforcement Officer I have ever met.

    2. Re:Skynet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is there any way to avoid such a thing short of cutting my net connection?

      Wouldn't do much good. They have a plethora of ways to extract information from your computers even if there is no internet connection.

      But I personally have nothing to hide.

      Yes you do. I'm not even going to go on about the "the average person commits 3 felonies a day without even knowing it," speech and instead just point out that everything you do in your private life is just that: private. It is yours, and unless they have a warrant, "they" (whoever "they" may be in your country of choice) should not have access to it under any circumstances. That, and even if you don't think you are a valid target, "they" might disagree. There's a number of people out there that thought they were safe and could trust the system, but you know how that turned out. Most recently, Feinstein is finding that she has been bitten by the very same spy machine she's been feeding, or how about Petraeus' mistress that was exposed through the use of so-called "meta-data."

      However, you're absolutely right that even if someone perceives themselves to not be a target, they should still move towards securing themselves.

    3. Re:Skynet? by The_Human_Diversion · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Is there any way to avoid such a thing short of cutting my net connection? Generally I am not too worried about the NSA. I think it is BS what they do as far as invasion of privacy. But I personally have nothing to hide. But this has completely changed the small amount of reluctance I had in becoming a "ZOMG da sky iz fallinz!" type.

      The "I have nothing to hide" argument is quite the slippery slope. Do you truly, really, honestly have nothing to hide? Let's put up cameras in every corner of your house, then. Perhaps we can get full copies of your bank statements? You may trust the NSA as a whole, but Snowden already showed that even a single bad apple can ruin a lot of days. What if he leaked compromising information of private citizens as part of his escapades? Would you have something to hide then? Hyperbolic? Sure. But because we've had even just a handful of instances of people having their lives screwed while innocent because surveillance - legal or illegal - uncovered something about them, it's a valid point. Read more. (article about why privacy matters)

    4. Re:Skynet? by WormholeFiend · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People with nothing to hide can still get wrongfully convicted with circumstantial evidence.

    5. Re:Skynet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, too, have nothing to hide.

      That is to say: among the things I have to hide is nothing, so that when they go looking to see what I hid there they'll be wasting their time.

    6. Re:Skynet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have nothing to hide actually means "I will never dissent so they'll never have a reason to go after me".

    7. Re:Skynet? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to mention that many people have something they'd like to hide. Perhaps nothing illegal, but something that would be embarrassing were it to become public knowledge. An agency that spies on everyone is one political move away from threatening to reveal these secrets if you don't tow the line.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    8. Re:Skynet? by bob_super · · Score: 1

      Write your own OS and browser, run it on an eval board for some mil-spec chip.

      Every common architecture, OS, and browser has known (and undisclosed) attack vectors. The only truly safe approach is to not use them.
      Then you can browse the web in full knowledge that your machine is safe, and only every single one of your actions will be tracked.

    9. Re:Skynet? by WormholeFiend · · Score: 2

      The principle is still valid.

      "According to your cellphone records, you were in the vicinity of an anti-government protest..."

    10. Re: Skynet? by macinnisrr · · Score: 1

      Even if you have something to hide, just don't mention it on the internet. Drug dealers don't usually mention drugs on their cell phone. If you're a criminal and don't adopt this strategy, you're just bad at your "job".

    11. Re: Skynet? by macinnisrr · · Score: 1

      Invasion of privacy sucks, I agree. But come on, how can any agency get information without an internet connection? I suppose you'll say "physical access", to which the answer is "linux+encryption", or "measuring emp" which is even more invasive. If you're breaking laws and don't notice the large surveillance van parked in front of your house for three days, you're an idiot.

    12. Re: Skynet? by macinnisrr · · Score: 1

      They can (and have) also be convicted with falsified evidence. What's the difference (other than the fact that continuous monitoring of everyone is far more expensive)?

    13. Re:Skynet? by sandbagger · · Score: 4, Informative

      Toe the line. TOE THE LINE. Not tow. Toe the line as 'line up over there'.

      --
      ---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
    14. Re:Skynet? by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      But I personally have nothing to hide.

      Nonsense.

      But really, desiring privacy is not wrong. There's nothing wrong with having something to hide.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    15. Re:Skynet? by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      Even having nothing to hide, and guilty of nothing, you are still target to confirmation bias. And a private joke could put you in deep troubles.

    16. Re:Skynet? by Traze · · Score: 1

      Actually, no. I dissent all the time.

      Do I incite riots? Nope.

    17. Re: Skynet? by macinnisrr · · Score: 1

      Well, this may be an interesting talking point, but really is a matter of attitude. Remember when Rob Ford admitted to smoking crack? I don't live in Toronto, but I applaud his honesty. The same goes for every other scenario on earth. If I cheat my wife, it's brought up, and I admit to it, I'll gain far more respect than if I deny, deny, deny.

    18. Re: Skynet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/us/nsa-effort-pries-open-computers-not-connected-to-internet.html?_r=0

      BTW someone told me about this more than 15 years ago. I thought the guy was crazy. Turns out he was right.
      I sooo wish he didn't also believe in this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLGxa3L1VJA
      because now I'm starting to think that might not be too far fetched either....

    19. Re: Skynet? by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      It is one of those theoretical things like being able to predict the number of a psuedo-random number generator. Apparently they "can" eves drop on you computer by listening to the fluctuation of your power supply. But like predicting the next psuedo-random number relies that you know what every single thing is doing, how many processes, what network traffic is incoming, etc, this relies on the fact that they can filter out with absolutely perfect certainty every other electronic device around the computer.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    20. Re:Skynet? by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      But I personally have nothing to hide.

      A form of this I like is "I have nothing to hide from people I trust". The NSA is way past the trust range now.

      And just because I'm not doing anything illegal, doesn't mean I don't have things I don't want private. Medical things, pr0n habits (which the NSA does use against you). I don't want them with leverage they're not entitled to.

      I forgot if it was the NSA or the CIA that investigated ex-gfs for no reason.

    21. Re:Skynet? by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 1

      It is the collective weight of people not giving a shit that gives the establishment the power to commit crimes against individuals who do give a shit. Give a shit, please.

      --
      Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
    22. Re:Skynet? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Funny

      Dough!

      I mean...

      Do'h!

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    23. Re: Skynet? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      True, but what Rob Ford only admitted to it because a video was obtained of him doing it. Before that, he denied everything. I'm not an expert on Canadian politics, but depending on the political climate, he might weather the storm and keep his job. Or not. Still, I'm sure he'd much rather this all stayed quiet. An NSA that listens to everyone all the time (even if not actively but storing data for future possible analysis) can - either for the purposes of the NSA retaining their power or for other political purposes - look up information on anyone and leak or threaten to leak information on people who don't sit down and keep quiet. The mere threat of doing this will be enough to silence some critics who would have something to lose (wives, children, family, jobs, etc.).

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    24. Re:Skynet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the credit card numbers. Here, put'em up here with the expiration dates.
      Wife's measurements would be pretty nice, I'm kinda bored right now.
      Your kids, any particular path they take to and from school?
      In what condition is your liver? Just askin.
      A business that prides itself on being "family friendly" would probably fire you if it knew how you got those children by the way, but hey...

      Nothing to hide, right?

    25. Re:Skynet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does help make the evidence appear more damning when you know where and when to plant it.
      I mean, wouldn't want something to have magically appeared to have been done by you in the middle of a rock-hard alibi. People might get suspicious about justice!

    26. Re: Skynet? by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      Well, this may be an interesting talking point, but really is a matter of attitude. Remember when Rob Ford admitted to smoking crack? I don't live in Toronto, but I applaud his honesty. The same goes for every other scenario on earth. If I cheat my wife, it's brought up, and I admit to it, I'll gain far more respect than if I deny, deny, deny.

      say that when you are framed for downloading CP.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    27. Re: Skynet? by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Honesty schmonesty. Deny, deny, deny is what Ford did, until the actual video was basically on the national news, then, and only then, did he admit to anything.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    28. Re: Skynet? by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Continuous monitoring makes it easier to manufacture a plausible source of the falsified evidence.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    29. Re:Skynet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say TOEmato and I say TOWmato.

    30. Re:Skynet? by jodido · · Score: 1

      The real point is not whether you think you have anything to hide or if you have inadvertantly committed your daily three felonies. When it suits the police, you will get caught up in a net. The evidence will appear, or else they will convince you that they have so much evidence against you anyway (whether you believe it's real or made up) that you will end up pleading guilty. An excellent film that shows how this works is "Sins of the Father." It takes place in the UK but happens here--and there, and a lot of other places--every day.

    31. Re:Skynet? by jodido · · Score: 1

      Or no evidence at all beyond what the cops invent. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03...

    32. Re: Skynet? by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      True, but what Rob Ford only admitted to it because a video was obtained of him doing it. Before that, he denied everything. I'm not an expert on Canadian politics, but depending on the political climate, he might weather the storm and keep his job. Or not. Still, I'm sure he'd much rather this all stayed quiet. An NSA that listens to everyone all the time (even if not actively but storing data for future possible analysis) can - either for the purposes of the NSA retaining their power or for other political purposes - look up information on anyone and leak or threaten to leak information on people who don't sit down and keep quiet. The mere threat of doing this will be enough to silence some critics who would have something to lose (wives, children, family, jobs, etc.).

      People line up around the block to buy a Rob Ford Bobblehead. He admits he smokes crack and his popularity goes up. Unfortunately it looks like he will probably weather the storm and get re-elected.

    33. Re: Skynet? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Of course, for every Rob Ford, there's a dozen other politicians whose scandals destroy their political career. If you're a politician and know you have something that's best not divulged (a partner on the side, drug use, visiting prostitutes, etc), you aren't going to want to take the chance that you can survive the scandal. Especially if the scandal involves something you've declared evil in the past. (Insert any of the very conservative Republicans who railed about how "the gays" were destroying America only to be found cheating on their spouses with someone of the same-sex.) If you were able to know exactly what shady things each of these politicians was up to (even if it wasn't illegal, but just embarrassing given past political stances), you might be able to control how they vote on some issues.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    34. Re:Skynet? by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      My point to the parent of my post is that he might not give a shit, but there is a place to do so. Perhaps take a minute to read through the end of my post?

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    35. Re:Skynet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I personally have nothing to hide.

      You might think so.

      The problem is that you have no say in the matter.

      You have plenty of things to hide. You are simply not aware of the fact that they need to be hidden in the first place, today or some day in the future. And when (if) you do become aware it's more likely than not far too late for you to do anything about it.

      It's really quite terrifying.

    36. Re:Skynet? by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 1

      Of course I read your whole post, but I'm not seeing your point. Are you saying privacy is less important when you're exhibiting your gaming skills than when you're exhibiting your IT skills?

      --
      Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
    37. Re:Skynet? by gcobb · · Score: 1

      It isn't about whether you have anything to hide. Even if you don't, there are many people you respect and value who do have important information to hide. Take your pick: your lawyer, your priest (who knows a lot of people's private problems), your doctor, your political representative, your schoolteacher, your favourite investigative journalist, your daughter's sexual health clinic, your local policeman, ...

      No so-called guardian of public morals or safety should be able to get access to any of that information without a properly constituted, and specifically targetted, warrant with a legal process. Whatever the suspected crime.

      If you ever visit Germany, visit one of their Stasi museums -- and then think about what they achieved with 1980's technology. And then think about what an over-authoritarion local police chief, or regional FBI/CIA chief could achieve with today's technology.

    38. Re: Skynet? by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      I am saying privacy is important within the workplace (I am not actually technically in IT). By extension, even though there are some things I don't care if I'm monitored on (gaming being a trivial example), because there are some things I have to care about, I must care always. It may not be clear enough from my post, but at the time, I thought the contrast was obvious. OP does not care at all.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    39. Re: Skynet? by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 1

      Ah...gotcha. Well done, then. I agree. Sorry for going off half-cocked.

      --
      Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
    40. Re: Skynet? by inasity_rules · · Score: 1

      No worries. Apparently I was unclear anyway - given the moderation, I don't think anyone else got it either...

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    41. Re:Skynet? by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

      Every time someone says "I have nothing to hide", the conclusion that immediately comes is this: So, in saying this, you are giving your permission to find out anything I can about you, and do whatever I want with that information. Do you really mean that?

      --
      There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
    42. Re:Skynet? by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

      BTW, if you go to the profile for the person who posted "But I personally have nothing to hide", you'll find the e-mail address is hidden.

      You can't make this kind of stuff up, folks.

      --
      There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
  3. All the more reason... by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Funny

    to pull out my old C64, dust it off and find my floppies.

    to a happier and simpler time

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:All the more reason... by AdamColley · · Score: 1

      You could afford a 1541?

      Most of us couldn't, cost more than the computer itself!

    2. Re:All the more reason... by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      to pull out my old C64, dust it off and find my floppies.

      to a happier and simpler time

      I was a VIC 20 guy myself. (Because no matter how many times we explained it to our parents they had no clue why what we really wanted was an Apple][...)

      As much as I miss those days, you'll have to pry my modern hardware from my cold dead hands, I rather like living in the 21st century where I can deploy applications to servers around the world with a click of a mouse and read books, watch movies and manipulate my entire music collection from a super computer in the palm of my hand.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    3. Re:All the more reason... by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      You could afford a 1541?

      Most of us couldn't, cost more than the computer itself!

      I upgraded to an Indus GT. =]

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:All the more reason... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Shh, or the NSA_BOT will document your suspicious activities for review.

    5. Re:All the more reason... by rvw · · Score: 1

      to pull out my old C64, dust it off and find my floppies.

      to a happier and simpler time

      You remember PEEK and POKE? What is this discussion about? Peeking and poking!

    6. Re:All the more reason... by antdude · · Score: 1

      Um, NSA can still install malwares onto it. It will be slower and more complex for that to happen. ;)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  4. Gotta be a red herring by SplatMan_DK · · Score: 2

    I can't believe this claim.

    I bet they did this a decade ago, and this article is just a way to make people believe it hasn't actually happened yet ...

    - Jesper

    --
    My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
    1. Re:Gotta be a red herring by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      'Expert System,' which is designed to operate 'like the brain.

      This is the point where it started sounding like a syfy.... Maybe they have malware but I doubt it operates like the brain.

    2. Re:Gotta be a red herring by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Well, it shows they were planning it back in 2009, so presumably they already have done it. We need to focus on detection.

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

    Shouldn't somebody go to jail for this?

    Apparently, the government is above the law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity When you steal money from someone, it is called a crime called theft but when the government does it, they call it taxes. When you extort money from someone, it is a crime but when the government does it, it is called a fine, levy, duty or fee.

    Don't steal, the government hates competition.

  6. Linux version? by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If not, we could finally be looking at the year of Linux on the desktop. :)
    For me Linux on the desktop came about five years ago.

    --
    If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    1. Re:Linux version? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't think you're so secure because you run linux.

    2. Re:Linux version? by mspohr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Linux is more secure.
      Also, Linux is less of a target.
      I'm glad that I use Linux. I'm also happy that most people don't use Linux.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    3. Re:Linux version? by invictusvoyd · · Score: 1

      You're right but I have a strong feeling that I have a chance to be far more secure on linux ..

    4. Re:Linux version? by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      "more secure" != secure. I'm sure a lot of the backbone goodness is on linux servers, and it's like swiss cheese to them. at least you feel more secure.

    5. Re:Linux version? by NuAngel · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, just the fact that you actually used the phrase "year of the Linux on the desktop" makes me crack up. I'm not a Linux hater by any means, but I've been hearing this same phrase since at least 1998. :)

    6. Re:Linux version? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For me Linux (Mint Debian) on the desktop came this year, for me, and, when the harddrive got corrupted on my wife's Vista laptop, on my wife's computer.

      No biggies yet. VMWare Player / VirtualBox are both free and runs most Windows applications. Never been happier now that I'm back on stationary PC, 32 GB RAM and a snappy videocard. No more laptop noise and heat issues. No more proprietary iTurds. Looking forward to SteamOS and linux gaming (Linux Steam is compatible and works like a charm once you have the right proprietary video card driver installed).

    7. Re:Linux version? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1, Troll

      Right. Because it's not as if they found a bug in GnuTLS security the other week, that compromises HTTP security in many Linux apps. A bug that may or may not have been planted by the NSA, but either way has been undiscovered for 9 years.

      There is nothing about Linux that makes it safer from government hacking. In fact the openness that allows many people, who's actual identities are not know to anyone, to contribute code makes it more vulnerable than a closed commercial OS.

      At least with a closed commercial OS you have to actually be an identifiable person working for the company to submit changes. Or risk posing as one. And there are people who are paid to do the boring testing and audits. Apple's equivalent of the GnuTLS bug was discovered in a matter of months, not years.

    8. Re:Linux version? by mspohr · · Score: 1

      If you read through TFA, you'll see that many of their exploits take place by exploiting MITM (and similar) attacks on the Internet communication. However, most of these exploits use some type of malware installed on the machines and that is where Windows is particularly vulnerable. It's much harder to compromise a Linux machine.
      (And please spare me the "But Linux does has bugz too" rant. Security is not absolute. It is a game of making it difficult to get to your data. Windows makes it easy. Linux makes it hard. Which would you rather have?)

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    9. Re:Linux version? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Neither.

      Neither one is intrinsically more secure as a desktop OS than the other. That Linux has had less malware is only because the market share is smaller.

    10. Re:Linux version? by mspohr · · Score: 0

      Just keep telling yourself that.
      Please don't switch to Linux.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    11. Re:Linux version? by forgottenusername · · Score: 1

      That's not real security. That's the same as security through obscurity.

      Linux and open source software has always had the security benefit of the code being distributed. No matter if specific components are properly audited or bugs exist for years before being discovered, it's still a powerful weapon you don't get with M$ / OSX et al.

      The more people who used Linux, the more eyes would be on the code. So yeah, it'd be more of a target, but the power of open ideals would also scale.

    12. Re:Linux version? by BasilBrush · · Score: 0

      Troll? Really? It might be a view you disagree with, but it's a perfectly valid view. Are Linux fans really so insecure in their beliefs that they need to mod down rather than debate?

    13. Re:Linux version? by aralin · · Score: 1

      Their original name bdlinux was too obvious, so the NSA renamed it selinux for "side entrance".
       

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    14. Re:Linux version? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right. Because it's not as if they found a bug in GnuTLS security the other week, that compromises HTTP security in many Linux apps. A bug that may or may not have been planted by the NSA, but either way has been undiscovered for 9 years.

      A bug in a single library is not the end of the world. If anything the fact it was found means it can be fixed, which as it happens: it was.
      Time to detect is meaningless. Some bugs exist today that have been there since the initial code was written. Not all of it is intentional. Treating it as if the developers knew about it and were conspiring against you, just because of how long it took to find the bug, is beyond idiocy.

      Also mentioning the NSA having potential involvement is a scare tactic, shame on you.

      There is nothing about Linux that makes it safer from government hacking.

      That is true. No system exists that is safe from a determined individual or group that has the resources and ability to destroy / compromise it.

      In fact the openness that allows many people, who's actual identities are not know to anyone, to contribute code makes it more vulnerable than a closed commercial OS.

      So you personally trust every single closed source commercial developer for every piece of software you use then? How well do you know them? What makes them known to you so well that you would trust them to work in your best interests despite any form of compromise, coercion, blackmail, or other incentives? Do you honestly believe that they will always work in your best interests? Or do you think that because you paid them once that they are in your debt for life?

      Do you know every single vulnerability that the software you use has and take precautions against it? Other than security through obscurity, what makes you think any software you use (closed or open source) is any more secure than any other software?

      At least with a closed commercial OS you have to actually be an identifiable person working for the company to submit changes. Or risk posing as one. And there are people who are paid to do the boring testing and audits. Apple's equivalent of the GnuTLS bug was discovered in a matter of months, not years.

      Once again verifiable to WHOM? No one but YOU will defend your best interests 100% of the time. A company is just as vulnerable to goverment meddling as an open-source project. Are you standing there watching every line of code being written, compiled and written to media? Examining each opcode that the system doing it is executing as well as the I/O generated? Placing blind faith in some random person who works for some random company is foolish. Just as placing blind faith in some random developer on the net commiting code to some random project is foolish. If you want security you have to verifiy it yourself. (I'm intentionaly ignoring the difficulity in doing that with software, but the point still stands as the act of doing so is not impossible just difficult.)

      What makes you think that the testing (if it is done) is accurate and honest? Yes, just because they can be dishonest does not mean they are, but at the same time the opposite is true too.

      Again time to detect is meaningless. To say that Apple is superior for finding their bug sooner than gnutls found theirs is pointless. What matters is that the bugs were fixed, not how long it took to find them after the fact. No one wins by saying "I found a bug in X amount of time!". Everyone benefits by saying "This bug is no longer an issue, as it has been fixed."

      Yes, not everyone is out to get you. At the same time saying one thing is secure over another just because of how it MAY have been made, is blind faith and can be taken advantage of. You should really take the whole situation into account before making such claims, you (and all of us) will be better off for it if you do.

      Captcha: threats

    15. Re:Linux version? by Burz · · Score: 1

      Securely run Linux or Windows to your hearts' content:
      http://qubes-os.org/

    16. Re:Linux version? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither.

      Neither one is intrinsically more secure as a desktop OS than the other. That Linux has had less malware is only because the market share is smaller.

      Are those planks end to end or side by side as thick as at least 10 of them or what! ..

    17. Re: Linux version? by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link about Qubes.
      Looks very interesting. Uses Xen and Linux to sandbox everything!

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    18. Re:Linux version? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Treating it as if the developers knew about it and were conspiring against you, just because of how long it took to find the bug, is beyond idiocy.

      I didn't do any such thing. I presented the possibility that the bug was placed there deliberately. As indeed it might. I never said it definitely was. Far from idiocy, in the absence of evidence one way or the other, this is the only rational view.

      Again time to detect is meaningless. To say that Apple is superior for finding their bug sooner than gnutls found theirs is pointless. What matters is that the bugs were fixed, not how long it took to find them after the fact. No one wins by saying "I found a bug in X amount of time!".

      You keep saying this, with no justification for your claim. And of course there is no possible justification. Everyone seeks to find and fix bugs as soon as possible, and longer times of being vulnerable are obviously worse than shorter (or no) times being vulnerable.

  7. SystemD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And the implant for Linux is called SystemD!

    1. Re:SystemD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all it really does is keep people from using Linux in the first place.

    2. Re:SystemD by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      And the implant for Linux is called SystemD!

      I always thought it was called SELinux.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
  8. hard to believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    but isn't turbine a 3d game engine?

  9. So now we now the NSA's plans for growth... by Are+You+Kidding · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is my Kaspersky Antivirus going to find and remove their viruses? Or even better, perhaps some enterprising hacker will write a tool that that sends its own malware back through the NSA bot net and trashes their servers. When I was a youngster "We Have Met The Enemy and He Is Us" was amusing. Now it it taken as a guiding principle by our intelligence services. It's sad.

    1. Re:So now we now the NSA's plans for growth... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Is my Kaspersky Antivirus going to find and remove their viruses?

      It seems like a good idea to avoid American make anti-virus software, as they may be working in cooperation with the NSA. But going for a Russian one doesn't seem like a terribly good idea, as you'll just get spied on by their security services instead. (Recently Russia gave out goodie bags to G20 representatives which contained spyware in USB drives and power supplies.)

      Likewise British and Israeli anti-virus would be a bad choice given their history of surveillance and cooperating with the US.

      So which country that we trust a bit more has an anti-virus company?

    2. Re:So now we now the NSA's plans for growth... by bug1 · · Score: 1

      Antivirus programs wouldnt even find and remove the sony rootkit.
      If you want to pay to be secure then you are not.

    3. Re:So now we now the NSA's plans for growth... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      You would need the skills to find the malware, note the ip/systems it reports back and have a history of finding gov backed malware efforts (made by gov or their favoured contractors).
      Some Russian firms have a great track record of finding varied gov backed malware deep in computer systems around the world and then telling the world of their findings.
      US software groups doing the same work might face the reality of national security letters, sealed courts or a gov chat.
      Recall the Magic Lantern, Carnivore and antivirus vendor efforts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... in the news years ago

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:So now we now the NSA's plans for growth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's amazing when we were during the period of teenage angst we had that remarkable cynical ability to not trust others. I guess as we get older, we stop blocking out the propaganda, just because it's easier.

  10. When am I going to get rid of this tinfoil hat? by dweller_below · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So, now it turns out that the NSA really was attacking me. Just because I ran the routers and a few other critical things.

    20 years ago, when I first started ranting about the NSA it was mostly theoretical. I ranted because there was no proof they were not evil. The stickers on my laptop's mic and camera were a bit of a joke. People would ask about them and it would give me a chance to rant. That's all I really wanted. A chance to rant from time to time.

    But, now it is clear that all my rants were too conservative.

    Now I am doing IT security for a university. I spend all day attempting to hold off the attacks of foreign governments. Some of those attacks now appear to be my own government. I never really wanted to be this paranoid. And it still appears that I am not paranoid enough.

    When will I ever be able to take off this stupid tinfoil hat?

    Congress keeps railing against money wasted on social programs. It appears the NSA and the CIA are elaborate social programs for sociopaths. Why can't we defund them?

    1. Re:When am I going to get rid of this tinfoil hat? by FudRucker · · Score: 2

      I physically removed the camera and microphone from my laptop, cant hack what does not exist anymore.

      its not that i do anything wrong, even if i am typing up chocolate cake recipes it is still none of their fucking business what i am doing, maybe i am using a cad program to build custom motorcycle parts i dont want those fascist pigs to steal it and give it to their criminal friends on wallstreet

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    2. Re:When am I going to get rid of this tinfoil hat? by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      that's the way to go. I covered my laptop camera with a sticker. haven't had the balls to do the mike yet. it's a very convoluted process on a macbook.

    3. Re:When am I going to get rid of this tinfoil hat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The NSA isn't attacking you. Just because they have a capability doesn't mean it is used against a US Entity. I own a gun, does that mean I'm going to shoot you? Or maybe you're just one of those people. Garsh.

    4. Re:When am I going to get rid of this tinfoil hat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am a fat old dude, I just moon my computer every day -- A moon a day keeps the NSA away.

    5. Re:When am I going to get rid of this tinfoil hat? by Burz · · Score: 1

      Qubes systems can keep things like cameras and mics effectively beyond the reach of remote attackers while running Linux and Windows apps.

      The core of the system is a pairing of Xen and X11/Linux which isolates the graphics, network and other risky services into less trusted domains. The result is that the trusted X11 can always show you what security context a window or other graphical element represents, even if the untrusted X11 in a VM becomes compromised-- You can't be tricked into thinking a malware element is really a part of the core OS.

      And that core OS allows you to (graphically or via CLI) sequester or assign hardware resources to various VMs; You can see at a glance if an untrusted or risky VM still has access to the mic and remove that access with a couple of mouse clicks.

      Of course, you still have to trust the hardware and firmware you got from the PC manufacturer.

    6. Re:When am I going to get rid of this tinfoil hat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NSA/GCHQ proved that doesn't work when they stole all those Yahoo(!(?)) video chats. There was probably some pretty unpalatable shit in there.

  11. Title should say "has significantly expanded" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Presentation is august 2009. 3.5 years is a long time in cyber.

  12. Are the encryption keys for rpms and debs safe? by Marrow · · Score: 0

    How do we know that the next update on linux is safe?

    1. Re:Are the encryption keys for rpms and debs safe? by Animats · · Score: 0

      How do we know that the next update on linux is safe?

      That's a very good question. Linus's position on the Intel random number generator not needing additional enthropy indicates he can no longer be trusted.

    2. Re:Are the encryption keys for rpms and debs safe? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      How do you know the current Linux is safe? How about last month? Last year? Five years ago? One hundred years ago?

      I'm not saying aliens wrote Linux, but... aliens created Linus.

    3. Re:Are the encryption keys for rpms and debs safe? by H0p313ss · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How do we know that the next update on linux is safe?

      Nothing is safe, it never was. A "safe" computer is one with no network behind a locked door where the users have to undergo a full body search before entering the locked room.

      Everything else is suspect. That's how NSA and their partners have worked for decades, get used to it.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    4. Re:Are the encryption keys for rpms and debs safe? by umghhh · · Score: 1

      difficult to judge linux for me - I still remember nights I was installing linux from mountain of floppies and days fighting x11 configuration. But git is a creation of aliens from outer space for me. I use it almost every day but I am also pretty sure that its use by mere mortals like me is an act of defiance similar to this guy who stole fire and got his liver extracted violently every day for the rest of his endless life....

    5. Re:Are the encryption keys for rpms and debs safe? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Its as safe as encryption hardware was in the 1950-80's or as good as encryption standards where till 2014....
      With the lists of weak software encryption, junk hardware, telcos splitting - just another way in?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re:Are the encryption keys for rpms and debs safe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How so? His comments of ... "
      Where do I start a petition to raise the IQ and kernel knowledge of people?
      Guys, go read drivers/char/random.c. Then, learn about cryptography. Finally, come back here and admit to the world that you were wrong.
      Short answer: we actually know what we are doing. You don't.
      Long answer: we use rdrand as _one_ of many inputs into the random pool, and we use it as a way to _improve_ that random pool. So even if rdrand were to be back-doored by the NSA, our use of rdrand actually improves the quality of the random numbers you get from /dev/random.
      Really short answer: you're ignorant." ...are spot on if you go through it.

      Brusque, as he tends to be, but given the medium and the tone of the change.org petition (which impacts Linux by exactly zero btw) I think it was warrented.

      Also, please look at the number of people that actually signed such a ridiculous thing. It had eight supporters. I think it made more news for the fact that it was so ridonkulous than for any other reason. It probably generated 1000x that number in usless and idiotic 'hits' by gullable people like me that actually took it seriously for more than the few minutes it took to vet for real technical issues.

  13. Mr Computer then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hehe...becoming harder to hide that strong AI...30 thousand staff...billions of messages per day....

    1. Re:Mr Computer then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I too am starting to put on a tin foil hat with regards to strong AI being out in the wild. A series of really complicated, highly coordinated political takeovers and maneuverings started to happen about 15 years ago, and I think they are just getting more ingenious as time goes on. I'm sorry, I don't believe our politicians/bureaucracy are that nimble/intelligent or that they can keep so many manipulations going on at the same time.

  14. USA - World Capital of Criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Criminal behaviour rules in USA. Come here criminals, you will be rewarded here. Law abiding citizens and people with integrity will thrown in jails.

  15. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you implying that the federal government is responsible for roads, power, and drinkable water while also trying to call him an idiot? And what does that, at all, have to do with him being an anarchist, exactly?

    Oh. You're trolling. I get it. You say stupid things to incite some harsh reaction. You got me; I'm so angry that someone on the internet is wrong

  16. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    The government does not provide ("make") roads, power nor drinkable water.

    Fuck you, statist twat.

  17. Plans to? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

    This is from 2009, so they've probably done it by now.

    1. Re:Plans to? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      This is from 2009, which means it was already done in 2004.

  18. So . . . by hduff · · Score: 0

    Has my meemaw's computer been compromised?

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  19. Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Microsoft beat them to it.

  20. Steam = NSA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But this DRM is so convenient!

  21. Fight terrorism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    By far the most effective way to fight terrorism these days would seem to be by dismantling the NSA. It's the largest terrorist organization in the world.

    And what a lot of money would be saved.

  22. Go big or go home by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    Must be missing something... I can't imagine how one could reasonably intend to infect millions of machines and not expect their stash of 0-days to be discovered and plugged in short order.. unless NSA plans to social engineer all of their victims to run the "fre3 v1agra" installer seems like a great way for NSA to shoot itself in the foot.

    1. Re:Go big or go home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is doing the patching? Where are the patches getting distributed? Shouldn't be too many sources they need to monitor for patches that are against their will.

    2. Re:Go big or go home by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Well the following may well have been the NSAs work, and they got away with it for 9 years.

      http://arstechnica.com/securit...

    3. Re:Go big or go home by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The method worked for tested encryption machines for embassies around the world, telcos helped for years without the press or staff really knowing too much... whats a few bugs in closed or open source code - reviews by people with great skills will find it all over time.
      Think of all the domestic and international offices, embassies, banks, govs, telcos, firms, brands, NGO's, police forces, armies, secretaries.. spreadsheets, crypto that has been sold or given as aid or for cooperation that provides a way in over decades.
      Spread wide and have a way in and out as needed i.e. the " installer" is the OS, the daily productivity applications, networking software.
      Why social engineer one firm when you can get a nations firms to install and update mandated junk encryption or OS or applications. Exchanges get an amazing digital upgrade with cheap international peering not national telco can resist...
      So many ways in, so few skilled experts per nation wondering why its all so cheap and they cant test it...

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  23. Infect millions? by mandark1967 · · Score: 1

    Whaddarthey gonna do? Buy Adobe?

    --
    Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
    1. Re:Infect millions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not funny.

  24. LinkSys TheMoon worm? by NuAngel · · Score: 2

    Anybody wonder if the plans in these documents (circa 2009?) have maybe adapted and become the recent Linksys worm?

  25. More to the terrifying point by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 2

    People with nothing to hide can still get wrongfully convicted with planted evidence.

  26. I'm sure Linus reviews everything. right? by Thud457 · · Score: 2

    How do we know that the next update on linux is safe?

    I thought you said you were going to audit it.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:I'm sure Linus reviews everything. right? by ShaunC · · Score: 1

      Linus' father has stated that NSA approached Linus and asked, quite frankly and up-front, to put a backdoor in linux. He of course refused. Then you have Linus himself answering that question "no" aloud, while nodding his head "yes." I have absolutely zero doubt that they've since attempted to slip something in surreptitiously, I wonder whether or not they succeeded.

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
  27. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In civilized countries the government provides all of those. They're all doing fine economically as well.

  28. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by mark-t · · Score: 1

    The government has always been above the law.

    The only time people in sufficient positions of power go to jail for crimes is when they governing body been sufficiently embarrassed by the situation they've created that they want to start over with a clean slate, and at least pretend like they never condoned whatever crime was committed Since this is determined by what the *government* actually wants, and not anything constituents may want or choose to do, there is no way that citizens can exercise any control over this.

  29. How to do this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get in bed with silicon manufacuters.
    Get in bed with a well known website such as google.com

    Have a trigger code in the website. or something like that.
    Have the processor essentially grep everything it sees for that trigger code. Have it execute the malicious instructions and return back in like a and have it replace xxx with some data.

    In this way, you can establish two way communication with the processor itself without it knowing anything about higher level protocols.

    Be afraid. There are few ways to avoid this.

    1. Re:How to do this by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 1

      CORRECT

      --
      Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
    2. Re:How to do this by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Depends on the funds and creativity of the staff and support they get.
      At a gov level: if you have an embassy revert to onetime pads and physical diplomatic bag/pouch. Make sure your staff understand the country they are working in - stop all political appointees for embassy staff - they are useless, the locals dislike them and don't reflect well on the embassy and its efforts.
      No fancy encryption fax machines, next gen encryption phones or tested encryption computers for fast "important" chats or documents.
      Remember if one nation can read your communications, their intelligence service might have staff with different faiths, in cults, varied politics i.e. a few other nations might get the your communications too :)
      If your a company - make sure your staff travel with clean hardware that never get back to the company after that one trip.
      If your writing some form of memoir find a good typewriter.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  30. Cyber war preparation by Framboise · · Score: 1

    Developing massive attack tools like that make a global cyber war more likely.
    As with the initial ICBM's the first one to strike may believe to win.
    Very dangerous, and foolish.

  31. There is already a name for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The system manages the applications and functions of the implants and 'decides' what tools they need to best extract data from infected machines."

    The rest of the world calls this a "botnet".

  32. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm the leech from above, with consistent employment. If plans pan out at my current place, I may reach the $80,000.00 range by the end of the year. I'm not rich, but I'm far, far away from needing any social assistance. I don't live in a huge city, so cost of living is quite low here. That salary goes a long way, and I'd gladly double my taxes to increase the services everyone here is getting.

    The roads here that are privately maintained are garbage, and the tolls aren't automated yet so they're slow as hell, while the city ones are always in considerably better shape.

    My hometown has a public energy utility. My current residence has choice of two, both far more expensive than my home, and they both cost the same. Why? I don't know.

    I don't have experience with private water (thank god) but in countries that do privatize water, service and cost isn't exactly an outcome.

    This isn't even addressing private vs public (when they're properly funded) education, healthcare, public safety, etc. I've never seen a favorable comparison in any of these cases, though.

    Don't want to be too serious, on Slashdot though, so here's a joke. Why is my 6 year-old a libertarian? He doesn't understand the world either.

  33. Legal reasoning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Phone Phreaking (i.e. playing tones into a phone) is a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, but installing malware on millons of computers, is not.

    Let's examine the language...

    (5) (A) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;
    (B) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or
    (C) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage and loss.


    A "compromised" computer is by definition a damaged computer, in terms of its original and expected behavior. This damage cannot be considered as anything less than "intentional" in the case of TURBINE.

    1. Re:Legal reasoning by canadiannomad · · Score: 1

      Read up on sovereign immunity. We need pitchforks.

      --
      Hmm, the humour and sarcasm seem to have been be lost on you.
    2. Re:Legal reasoning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is the Magna Carta? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta

    3. Re:Legal reasoning by canadiannomad · · Score: 1

      A historical document who's only modern significance is that sometimes pitchforks work.

      --
      Hmm, the humour and sarcasm seem to have been be lost on you.
  34. The Lords On The Hill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh look the gentry and the elite doing what they tell us not to do. My, how times NEVER change.

  35. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Riceballsan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While I agree with the fact of the rediculousness of how the government can do crime in many ways that would otherwise be illegal. Equating taxes to it is just plain stupid. Taxes are logical payments for services in which the government can and does provide. IE the roads, the oversight into companies to prove that our food isn't entirely relabeled rat droppings, fire departments etc.. Now is it done perfectly or even well? Not in the least, but no matter what a functioning society is going to need a tax system. Even if a perfect rebuilding of government happened, taxes would absolutely be a necessity.

  36. Duty by symbolset · · Score: 1

    In a world where 90% of desktops can't even display a JPEG securely, to not have this capability would be dereliction of duty.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  37. It's called the Xbox One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How many Xbox One consoles have sold? Microsoft claims 4 million+. That's 4 million homes that have each willing placed the most sophisticated NSA spy device imaginable in prime position to track the household residents 24/7.

    Microsoft and their NSA partners, when considering the change of policy that allows (in theory) people to use the console WITHOUT either Kinect of an online connection (both originally compulsory requirements), found that market research indicated a 95%+ likelihood of users choosing to use the console in an NSA optimal fashion.

    Essentially, if a person were thick enough to ignore the clear warnings that Microsoft designed the Xbox One to spy on users, they'd actually take a pride in setting up their console according to the NSA guidelines.

    Snowden proves over, and over, and over, and over that the GCHQ and NSA are about every aspect of 'full surveillance', and that those people who don't consider themselves as valid targets are exactly the people the NSA are most interested in hitting. A kid screaming the N-word over and over while playing an online game of 'Call of Duty' may one day be a politician whose vote is sought in support of yet another vile war of aggression. Showing him video of his 'racist' outbursts, and asking him how his electorate might respond to such a 'leak' in the press will gain the vote of 90%+ of all people blackmailed this way.

    Yet the Xbox One goes so much further. A 'super computer' (by the definition of less than a decade back) connects to a military grade sensor that actually measures the speed of light at each pixel, providing for unprecedented analysis of movement in the room. The Xbox One can be trivially taught to recognise any common pattern of movement (especially the rhythmic movements associated with sexual activity), and begin recording/uploading when such a trigger happens.

    Every Xbox One is continually running facial and voice recognition services. And the result of these calculations is uploaded daily to NSA servers in the cloud. NSA computers, mostly using algorithms designed by Google for this purpose, process the facial photographs and voice samples to extract better identification information. The NSA goal is to know who enters/leaves every room with an Xbox One, and when.

    The NSA NEVER, EVER, EVER needs hacking or 'trojans' to control the Xbox One computer system. Microsoft provides the NSA with a copy of every Xbox One encryption/authorisation key, so EVERY single online console 'phones home' to NSA servers, and any one of these consoles can be instantly remotely controlled by an NSA agent.

    The NSA has far more than its 'fair' share of paedophiles. These individuals have unlimited access to the camera systems of Xbox One consoles located in the bedrooms of children. The video that flows from these cameras is encrypted on-the-fly, so the NSA sex criminal that chooses to use the NSA facility this way can avoid detection if he has even one working braincell.

    Snowden is giving a VERY limited snapshot of NSA/GCHQ behaviour in the distant past- 'distant' in the sense that even 5 years back is an eternity when considering the world of computer based surveillance. The owners of Slashdot emphasis, as much as they can, lesser and obsolete abuses by the NSA.

    The Xbox One makes all previous forms of full surveillance look like they belong in the Stone Age, and yet Microsoft/NSA reputation management policies on forums and social networks ensure that, even today, those that warn about Xbox One spying are dismissed as "paranoid nut-cases". Every single tech site, this one included, has the official position that no NSA spying occurs via the Xbox One. Every monster in History has followed the principle "if you operate through lies, make your lies as BOLD as possible- the bigger the lie the better it works".

       

    1. Re:It's called the Xbox One by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 1

      Thank you, Coward. That Xbox One summary was as clear as it could possibly be. It feels to me like it should be intuitively obvious to others, but I've come to believe that's fallacious thinking--the availability error that causes us to imagine other people to be like ourselves. I'm afraid you're guilty of the same fallacy when you say "if a person were thick enough to ignore the clear warnings". There is no "if" here. Normal everyday people ARE that "thick". It's people who see this problem clearly who are exceptional. Speaking of that...you may as well give up posting as Coward. Textual criticism will identify you and your posts when they want you. even if you're using tor.

      --
      Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
    2. Re:It's called the Xbox One by dbIII · · Score: 1
      I was very impressed with the above post until I got to this bit:

      connects to a military grade sensor that actually measures the speed of light at each pixel,

      At that point I despaired at how someone that obviously received a decent education in english was very badly shortchanged with their school science education. IMHO that decline goes hand in hand with acceptance that those in power know what's best, instead of what should happen with the people administering a nation merely being in place to be servants of the will of the people. With a deficient education it makes it harder for people to spot when they are being misled by elected people that just see it as a free ticket to the aristocracy.

    3. Re:It's called the Xbox One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bailed at "24/7" ... it's not like they exluded the on/off switch.

      Perhaps someone has dedicated too much time to console games.

    4. Re:It's called the Xbox One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could remove the kinect. The box still works without it.

  38. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't those things then be provided and nearly free then?

    Because even though I'm paying record taxes of *thousands* a single paycheck, it seems shit is just shutting down left and right here in Detroit.

    Roads are horrible, schools shutting down and bussing to horrid inner-city schools, power is so spotty people complain that they cannot leave for vacation or pets will die. Recently the water plant notified everyone that they failed to maintain the proper city water testing schedule.

    So every time I make a $4800 gross paycheck for 2 weeks..... Where exactly is my $2000 going since I only net $2800 of that as a single white male? Car insurance is record high despite a clean safer driver record for 5+ years. Property values plummiting....

    Yet I always hear how millions were stolen from this city thing, or lost to that city contract, or someone sued and got X million from the city...... Where are MY taxes going? Not seeing any of these things you are talking about.

  39. Like you haven't though of that for years by pseudorand · · Score: 1

    Okay, everybody, stop your whining. I'm pretty sure every one of us reading slashdot has had somewhere near the middle of his or her to-do list something along the lines of "script mass exploit of remote computers in case I ever need to give the entire world a big F-U". There it is, just below "implement monitoring for everything" and just above "stock up for immanent apocalypse" (which fell a few spots in late 2012). It probably won't ever float high enough to actually make much progress on, but we've all though of it. If you could get someone to actually pay you to work on that one in a semi-legitimate fashion (i.e. NOT the mafia or Russian government), wouldn't you jump at the chance?

    1. Re:Like you haven't though of that for years by uCallHimDrJ0NES · · Score: 1

      It's funny...I was JUST posting about the availability error one comment above this one. Pseudorand, every sysadmin in the world is not like you. You are a unique and special snowflake. Maybe you should be a spy!

      --
      Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
  40. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by sjames · · Score: 1

    No, those are something else entirely. The crimes happen when government agencies exceed their mandate or the limits of the Constitution. Of course, that puts the NSA firmly on the wrong side of the law here. I'm just waiting for the announcement that they are merging with the RBN. If they were at all honest, they would have struck the colors and hoisted the Jolly Roger by now.

  41. The destruction of the Internet? by PineHall · · Score: 1

    “Hacking routers has been good business for us and our 5-eyes partners for some time,” notes one NSA analyst in a top-secret document dated December 2012. “But it is becoming more apparent that other nation states are honing their skillz [sic] and joining the scene.”

    This is the really scary part. Other nations are doing it and soon criminal organizations will be doing it, if not already. They are destroying the internet as we know it. Purchase something online and have your money routed to elsewhere or have your credit balance jump to new heights as others use your credit information. Here is a possible senario: "You charged me for 10 widgets." "No sir, we charged you for one and you received it. We did not receive money for 10 but only for the one."

    1. Re:The destruction of the Internet? by PPH · · Score: 1

      The Rest Of The World should be working on hacking BGP to make paths between the NSA and the world unroutable.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  42. The Expert System by hughbar · · Score: 1

    I love the Expert System. Was it designed by the Really Clever Person? Is Dr. Evil working on the Really Stupid System to counter it? Go figure, or not, depending on the Really Mathematical System.

    --
    On y va, qui mal y pense!
    1. Re:The Expert System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Expert Systems are kind of an older name for self adapting/programming systems that follow some basic guidelines. These days, the most challenging thing is 'teaching' them what you want them to try to optimize/validate/discover on their own - those 'guidelines' that I spoke of. No matter how much CPU you have, they can burn through all of it and a few thousand times more if you let them...

      They've even been possible since the DOS days and I'd be massively surprised if they weren't much further advanced than what was inferred in some of what was released.

      I've been specializing in self tuning/self modifiables for quite some time, and I use them daily for stuff like unit tests, database normalization and tuning, input validation, input/data class recognition, optical character recognition, video recognition/object tracking, things related to CVE's, etc, etc...

      Some tend to call it AI - but that has some unpleasant connotations also. Some of us that play with that subject everyday, but would never think we're creating 'creativity', real intelligence. Just stuff that can fake it - sometimes really well.

    2. Re:The Expert System by hughbar · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I wasted some of your time. I know all that, I was being sarcastic.

      --
      On y va, qui mal y pense!
  43. This could be good news for Americans by MXB2001 · · Score: 0

    If only the NSA were on their side and not a maverick sovereign terrorist group!

    --
    01/01/01
  44. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Leave, everyone else did. Someone's gotta pay to keep the pipes under all those empty houses, light all those empty streets, bus all the empty schools. That somebody is the sucker still living there. That somebody is you.

      The only thing that can save Detroit is to disincorporate its suburbs. It might be able to survive as a quaint little hamlet of a dozen acres or so. The people living outside of it can then decide whether to move back into town or find their own water and sewers and police.

  45. Only an NSA troll would be bold enough to say that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what is the point of huge list that says:

    John Smith
    John Smith
    Jone Smith
    John Smith ...

  46. wouldn't it be cheaper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wouldn't it be cheaper to just rent an existing botnet army?

    1. Re:wouldn't it be cheaper by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      An existing botnet army could have a few state and federal informants in its upper levels. Court cases, legal teams on both sides, political leaders and law enforcement press contact can let interesting details become public for many different reasons over time. From state/federal funding, to a job well done, to entrapment, issues with fame, methods, been seeing doing something with hi tech...

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  47. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As bad, if the NSA can do it, so can others. Either they will hijack the NSA's 'wares, or they will use the same vulnerabilities and methods pioneered by these government agencies. Rather than working to protect the nation's citizenry, businesses and infrastructure, the NSA and others are actively undermining our security. Their mandate is not only to intercept enemy signals but to ensure that those of the country's are not similarly compromised. So not only have they overreached too far in one direction, they have ignored the equally important other part of the job.

    Sadly, even if the NSA did start offering secure solutions for people, would anybody trust them enough to take them up on it?

  48. Windows 7 and 8... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup, as suspected, are the "vector" OSs. 'nuff said...

  49. Bathroom stalls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is why bathroom stalls have doors.

  50. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by LF11 · · Score: 1

    In civilized countries, security agencies watch you sleep.

  51. Remotely compromised infected machines .. by DTentilhao · · Score: 1

    Just how useful has Microsoft Windows been to the NSA in the ease of remotely compromising these "computers"?

  52. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fuck your 6yo

    Sounds like something the typically Liber's into.

  53. As I have said many times.... by Grey+Dragon · · Score: 1

    Government is there to shuffle papers, maintain infrastructure and do the public's bidding. Not imprison and interfere with other people and countries.

    --
    If at first you don't feel good.... suffer like the rest of us.
  54. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Nephandus · · Score: 2

    Logical payments would require opting out without penalty, not being force to pay someone else's bills, and not being arbitrarily charged for the collector just wanting more.

    --
    "A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head."
  55. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

    I've got some moronic friends (around 20 years old) who keep calling themselves anarchists, but they have yet to attempt to assassinate a government official. I keep telling them their not really "hardcore" until they at least TRY to take out some gov dupe, but all they want to do is do drugs and rant at coffee houses.

  56. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Riceballsan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A society isn't exactly an area that "opting out" is plausible. A police officer can't exactly take the time to determine whether or not someone opted into the "save me if someone is holding a gun to my head" plan, The fire department can't wait for the fire to spread from your proporty before begining to fight it, we can't exactly set up a "food tested to be safe" and "eat at your own risk" sections of the grocery store, A good portion of things that are paid for by taxes, are things that just have to be do it for everyone in the area, or don't do it at all sort of things. Humans have already learned that creating a society with more than 50-100 people, involves some form of infrastructure, and everyone in that society has to chip into that infrastructure. If anarchy worked, there would be a first world country that has an anarchy you could move into. Unfortunately natural selection did not favor such societies, they died out or were invaded and taken over by societies that actually had a functional military etc...

  57. Isn't this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of them massive government over reaches that y'all need the guns to make sure that it doesn't happen?

  58. Probably already happened by dbIII · · Score: 1

    There's been shitloads of malware infections since 2009 despite everyone's best efforts and more people moving off XP to win7.

  59. Just Jail? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe more like whipped 100 lashes with a horsewhip while tied to a whipping post, then tarred and feathered and locked up in a pillory in a public square for a few days while fed only bread and water. Then when they recover physically from that, about 10 years in a chain gang doing hard labor.

  60. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Nephandus · · Score: 1

    Humans, no. Feudal lords and khans that evolved their propaganda to pretend to be more than mere warlords. Nations run by politicians only recognize nations run by politicians. It's like monotheists with other monotheists vs polytheists, much less atheists. They're assumed out of the power question thus fair game. Society as you're defining it is merely a power game, and taxes are robbery to maintain that power, just like the old tribute days. Most taxes go to propping up malfunctional "social" programs meant to farm sheeple and sheepledogs for the shepherds. Sheepledogs regularly openly violate the pretense of functional "order" to run extralegal enforcement as per TFA. It's not even a coherent system, never was, never will be, barring social engineering and technology eventually giving us the bastard child of Idiocracy and the Borg.

    --
    "A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head."
  61. Re: crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hello there nsa covert op. is this the samen advice you gave to marathon bomber? how are your psyop green field studies coming along? have you reached 99% sucess rate in turning legit basement dwellers into mass murderers yet?

  62. I hope you've all clicked on the link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I see that you have. Eeeeeeeeeexcellent...

  63. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by fredprado · · Score: 1

    Oh, but there are many things you COULD opt out in current society with very little trouble, many many more than those you couldn't. You are right about some government functions that are needed to make society work, but as governments grow the vast majority of the tasks it takes for itself are not critical and should not be imposed upon people regardless of their wishes.

    Coercion should be applied only where there is no other way.

  64. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Why is my 6 year-old a libertarian? He doesn't understand the world either.

    Because even a six year old can see the federal government is beyond repair if it remains a two party system?

  65. How is this not exactly like 1984? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know this comes up in pretty much every single NSA/CIA/whatever discussion but infecting millions of computers so you can listen in on what every single person is doing.. How is that not exactly what is described in 1984? The only difference being is they don't currently have the power to sort through all that information. As soon as they find a way to do so free society is gone.

  66. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just leave the country, if you don't like it.
    Go start your own country and see how you fare without taxes (You are borderline retarded if you believe that people will not all 'opt-out').

  67. Mark of ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any time someone uses that word, you can tell he's part of the Molyneux cult.

    Governments in functioning countries do provide all of the things you mention. They also work to keep ensuring the safety and quality of the same.

  68. No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We weren't supposed to find out about this at all. TURBINE is a codename for a software company front, and the NSA carefully disguised the tool as an MMO that people not only play voluntarily, but pay the NSA for the privilege.

    You may have heard of it. It's called "Lord of The Rings Online."

  69. OSX. BAckdoor.Morcut-9 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OSX. BAckdoor.Morcut-9 is a government trojan, according to https://www.securelist.com/en/... I suspect it's part of the NSA dropper profgram.. I found it in a file I got in a legitimate gaming circle. It's used to spy on people and can be activated remotely. So yes, the article is true

  70. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    It's been a two-party system for most of well over two centuries. It may be beyond repair, but I don't see that it's any more broken than it has been for centuries.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  71. Re:crime? Sovereign Immunity. by dbeachy1 · · Score: 1

    That salary goes a long way, and I'd gladly double my taxes to increase the services everyone here is getting.

    In that case, the IRS will not mind one bit if you send them a nice check on April 15th for the extra $20,000 or so. Still want to pay double your current taxes?

    If however you meant that you would be glad if the *rest of us* paid double taxes, I'll have to say, "No, thank you."

    It's always easy to spend other people's money. Which is why so many politicians have no issues with spending more and more each year.

  72. Who would prosecute? by billd10 · · Score: 0

    Since the Attorney General is a pawn of the president, only those laws the president wants to be enforced are enforced. This is a government operation to put all the citizens of this country under government control, and approval of these programs goes all the way to the top. Maybe a private lawsuit would work, funded by deep pockets.

  73. Microsoft beat them to it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They installed Windows.