Slashdot Mirror
Snowden Queries Putin On Live TV Regarding Russian Internet Surveillance
Rambo Tribble (1273454) writes "Edward Snowden appeared on a Russian television call-in show to ask Russian President Vladimir Putin about policies of mass surveillance. The exchange has a canned quality which will likely lead to questions regarding the integrity of Snowden's actions, in the query of his host in asylum."
These propaganda sessions for Putin are pre-staged so Snowden has allowed himself to be used as a "propaganda tool". Considering how freedoms are curtailed in Russia, it seriously deminishes Snowden's reputation.
It loses a bit in the translation but essentially it says "When you're living with wolves, you better learn fast how to howl, lest they might think you're a sheep".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Putin is under no compunction to tell the truth. And there's no reason to expect he would.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
You forgot to use "some say" and include your speculation as a question in the headline.
So Eric, are you enjoying your new life as a stooge for the Russians? How does it compare with being a stooge for the Americans? You had better weather and more money in Hawaii I bet.
What a loser.
SORM is mandated to be installed in all ISPs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SORM
... but what a tool. The quintessential useful idiot, really.
"We will hear and they will be punished!!!"
I wouldn't put it past the Russians to stage such an appearance by threatening Snowden. In fact, that's the most likely scenario; Putin could hand him over to the US at any time.
But you have to read the statement carefully to understand what he says. It is true that Russia doesn't have the money to put everyone under surveillance like the US does.
So they might not do a mass surveillance like the US, instead they just put everyone interesting under direct surveillance: every Duma representative, every Oligarch, and especially everyone who is in public politicial opposition to President Putin. The NSA can't do that even when they would want to, so they simply target everyone: it's wasteful but now they can't be accused of any bias or that they target anyone they don't like.
Troll much?
LOL oh man you are so right, look how many terrorist attacks have happened since the snowden leaks eh, now that all of the NSAs spying techniques are known and now stopped. I guess the bad guys have all moved now from forming plots via gmail & twitter & facebook to secretz underground cave meetings! Snowden deserves to be somewhere better than back in the US, unfortunately, not too many places qualify for a position like that these days...
A good lier should not lie most of the time, otherwise one just needs to reverse the saying to know the truth with high probability.
On that account Obama is smarted than Putin IMHO. He does lie, but in a less systematic manner.
He already admitted this did not happen. Of course, his kind keeps spouting lies because that is what their kind does. The odd thing here though is why is /. pushing the Republican propaganda? /. has gone full on CONservative retard. This used to be a technical site, but now those Republicans are trying to make everything about politics.
It was released to the press and only to the press, notably The Guardian and the Washington Post. Where we've all seen it. Or can you point me to a tarball with all the Snowden documents, unredacted by anyone else? Can you? No, cause that doesn't exist.
Seems you should educate yourself about things before you commenting on things?
He's a traitor and a corrupt piece of crap. He's caused more harm to world peace than even Putin. The two certainly belong together.
Where I agree he's a traitor... I think you ascribe him way too much power. Snowden is, at this point, just a pawn being used by Putin.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
gets all the propaganda and the middle fingering towards the US he need's, Snowden is done. Putin wil probably use him as a giff to the US.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
since the main reason to adopt this software is to not pay at all.
The main reason for me to adopt it is so that I can know what it's doing and more easily have control over what it does.
Indeed, who would review other people's code for free or for fun?
Plenty of people. Who would make software for free or for fun? Plenty. The fact that you have to ask such questions proves your own ignorance. You think everyone is out for money, but that is not true. But there are also people who do review it for money.
And what about the fallacy of the claim that proprietary software is secure? No software is completely secure, but at least with open source, you have control over it, and you can see what it's doing, even if it's unlikely you'll spot anything. That's the real claim people are making, not that it's completely secure.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
Archives of the document were on Guardian public servers when the password was mysteriously "leaked."
When people speak like this, debate is dead and we're into monkeys flinging poo at each other.
Futurist Traditionalism
We *did* see revelations in the press: WaPo and the Guardian know more stuff than they've published, and redact things. They won a Pulitzer recently.
If he were a whistleblower, we would have seen revelations in the press, not a document dump to the public.
Sense. This makes none.
The "press" exists to sell a product. Nothing more. Nothing less. You seem to be confused and think we live in an early 1900s-era America that never really existed.
If Obama were questioned on live TV about surveillance practices I would assume his responses were lies too.
But this is not relevant to question of the Putin/Snowden interview.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
The "document dump" to the public wasn't from Snowden, it was from Greenwald and Poitras. Like a number of whistleblowers who Americans have come to praise in respect, Snowden gave these documents to journalists and asked them to redact them before release to the public. If you have any issues with how that played out, Greenwald, Poitras and other news figures involved are the ones to blame.
Rumours circulate that most if not all of the hard drives that Snowden had with him upon his flight to Hong Kong were decoys.
What "spy" dumps their haul to the public?
Revealing that something has been stolen alerts the target. Spies don't do that deliberately.
Muddleheaded idiots around here....
There's something amusing about Snowden fleeing from the US and ending up in Russia, of all the places. This video shows that he's making use of the channels of free speech there.
Even more amusing was the beginning of Putin's response "You've worked for a spy agency [NSA]. I previously worked for a spy agency [KGB]. We understand each other - we can have a professional dialog." There could have been a suppressed snicker there... and he might as well have followed by saying "you know how the real world operates. so let's not be naive here..."
More seriously:
1) Would it be bad, from Snowden's standapoint, to come back to the US after all the publicity he's got. The possibility that he might get locked up silently and they key thrown away seems remote, given the vast amount of public support he has. And if he was committed to bringing about positive change, then one would see that returning and standing trial would further that mission.
2) Would it be bad, from the US government's standpoint for him to come back? For now he and the can of problems he opened seem conveniently stashed away in Russia. So if he came back, what then?
When did Slashdot become infested with NSA apologists?
Putin does this show annually. I am sure that the callers are vetted, but the questions tend to be wide-ranging, and don't really seem scripted to me. (I liked the one about buying Alaska back.) After all, it's a 4 hour show.
Now, as for Snowden, I see this as positive. State security is not talked about that much in Russia, and he brought it up. While Putin said pretty much what Obama might have said in 2010 (in other words, it's fair to doubt whether he was being truthful), it gets it out in the open, and all in all I think that is a good thing.
...know about surveillance?
Even the questions you can ask are provided by the state..
OF COURSE it was scripted and likely highly edited. This is 100% propaganda aimed squarely at the west by Putin. Snowden is just being used to attract attention and shape the message. He's just a pawn in a much larger game.
Reading between the lines though, I wonder what Putin is up to. Why bother with this?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
I was really on the fence, teetering into anti-Snowden territory... but this gave me a really strong push. SO - is Snowden:
1. So blinded by his hatred for America that Russia actually seems better to him? Or
2. So stupid that he went to Russia not realizing that he'd be forced at gunpoint into becoming a tool of Putin?
Honestly, Ed - thanks for the disclosure, it was something that we really needed. But you did it for the wrong reasons, made some incredibly stupid choices, and I look forward to when you're spending the rest of your life in a tiny cell. Maybe you can share a room with Assange.
Rumours circulate that most if not all of the hard drives that Snowden had with him upon his flight to Hong Kong were decoys.
That would be a very useful rumor to spread for a spy planning to engage in a scheme of political warfare. Truly a masterpiece.
Unfortunately it doesn't pass the smell test. Why bring all that extra equipment if you are fleeing?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Heh, good one, Mr. Putin.
Oh wait, you were serious?
HAHAHAHA!!!
To anyone who ever says that Snowden told the terrorists about bugging. The 2010 film Four Lions has a scene with the terrorist plotters using a spoof on Disney's "Club Penguin", making it the only safe method to chat to each other (it's a black comedy). Interception was so widely known, it was a joke (see Bin Laden's lack of house-hold comms).
The people who didn't suspect that electronic comms were all thoroughly bugged were the other 99.999999% of the population. They thought the 'goodies' were targeting the 'baddies'.
How scary is the world you live in? It's like the brains can't process the possibility of something not having an ulterior motive.
Stop!! Not everybody is as damaged inside as you.
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
Contrast these two statements:
A) Someone somewhere in the city would like to harm you.
B) Your neighbor Bob plans to throw five Molotov cocktails now in his garage through several of your windows tonight at 2:00 AM and shoot your family as they come screaming out the door.
Do you think there is a useful difference in specificity there? Details matter. The claim that the terrorists "just knew already" is bullshit and a whitewash. Terrorist groups have changed their communication methods since Snowden's leaks and intelligence has been lost because of it.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
As someone into the business, there's only two prerequisites (concerning surveillance) to operate as an ISP in Russia. The first one is that you must (by the law) to store your ISP's netflow for 2 years, and to provide information for a) specific user (given by First + Last name) or b) by the IP address involved, to a) police, b) FSB or c) court, when they wanted to. And the second one, is that ISP required (by the law) to install surveillance equipment, sufficent enough to capture all the traffic of ISP's very own local clients (not the transit ones). That equipment is called "SORM" which means something like "support of investigation operations". That equipment is a bulk storage that is filled with data from selected customer IP when configured to. Equipment is controlled from local FSB office, using only E1 (smth like DS1) control channel. There's no bulk channel between ISP and FSB office because there's no bulk money at local government to pay to ISP for that. When they think they had gathered enough data. for specific subject, they can use this captured data from the SORM storage in the court. With the current ISP traffic plans, that storage can only held smth like 2hrs of all client's traffic captured simultaneously. Could you consider this as a "massive surveillance"?
Do you think there is a useful difference in specificity there? Details matter. The claim that the terrorists "just knew already" is bullshit and a whitewash. Terrorist groups have changed their communication methods since Snowden's leaks and intelligence has been lost because of it.
Does the NSA not have the technology to steam-open their letters, or what? (Also, I call bullshit. The actual (non-business secrets, non-webcam) intelligence the NSA has captured is about zero. Notice how surprised everyone was (is) by the Crimea-Ukraine-thingie? And if they didn't see something like that coming...)
How inappropriate to call this planet Earth, when clearly it is Ocean.
He no longer has power unless he has some kind od way to stop the release of new information. However he absolutely gutted American intelligence. Despite America's flaws, it is still the world's insurance against the worst of humanity.
The middle road
The Russian Federation is becoming the Land of the Free.
The world renown dissidents, Edward Snowden, Sarah Harrson, Bradley Manning, Julian Assange are asking Russia for asylum. What is going on?
How could this happen? What has become with:
I live in the country
Where people are free
And joy is the birth-right
Belonging to me.
Yeah. Snowden is taking away your freedom!
Like really! ... .. no.
>Crimea-Ukraine-thingie? And if they didn't see something like that coming
Half serious here. First of all, even The Simpson saw this coming. Secondly, (and more seriously), how do you know they didn't know? Because they didn't respond? Radio silence is a poor indication of a message failing to be intercepted.
just that they don't do it illegally
In this sort of conversation, that is the only thing that matters, period.
Russia is following their own laws, whereas the US is not following its own laws.
Having grown up in the 80s, let me state:
That's such a fucking ridiculous situation that it defies all belief, logic and sanity.
I don't understand the hatred towards Snowden for asking an important question regarding surveillance. From the linked article his question:
"So I'd like to ask you, does Russia intercept, store or analyze in any way the communications of millions of individuals? And do you believe that simply increasing the effectiveness of intelligence or law enforcement investigations can justify placing societies, rather than subjects, under surveillance?"
It is a perfectly valid question which needs to be asked to all world leaders. While Putin's answer can certainly be seen as pure political spin, the question itself is a legitimate and forceful question to be posed. And by asking it, it forced Putin to provide an answer through which he can be measured against. He has basically said in nationwide tv that if they did have a mass surveillance system, the state would be breaking the law. This public statement can now be used to hold him accountable should evidence surface proving him as lying.
I would also argue that the question is a far more direct one regarding surveillance than any that has been posed to Obama. And unlike Putin, Obama insists such a surveillance program is legal and necessary. One cannot reform the system without admitting the problem first. Were Obama to give the same answer as Putin to that question, the repercussions would be enormous, as it places a moral and legal standard on the role of surveillance in our society from the chief executive of the nation itself.
Perhaps they didn't see it coming because Russia had detailed knowledge of our sources and methods thanks to Snowdon.
Amusingly, the entire Crimean plan is in the Wikileaked documents from 3yrs ago.
There's a middle ground between just accepting to be thrown into some military prison and being the new BFF of a dictator that has no concern for human rights whatsoever.
Hell, give it a try and flee to switzerland. And if you end up in moscow by chance, don't play along with Putin's propaganda. And don't make your press contact keep back all information on russian intelligence workings, if you're just about "publishing what's real". And yeah, please don't tell me that he happened to miss all that info on counter intelligence.
Well, now the intelligence services work for him. You don't say you currently work as a servant even if you used to be a servant yourself and currently use servants.
Terrorist groups have changed their communication methods since Snowden's leaks and intelligence has been lost because of it.
Prove it. (And before you say it can't be proven the other way either, go back and read the comment you're replying to, which correctly points out that when they found him, Bin Laden's house didn't have any electronic communications in or out. That was years before Snowden.)
That heavily depends on "to whom?" For example, in my eyes it doesn't hurt his reputation at all. Granted, while "useful idiot" comes to my mind as a handy association when thinking of Snowden, "loser", "traitor" or "defector" come before, so there's simply nothing to be hurt.
Troll 2.0 Fear my asocial networking!
All he did was getting job with access to classified materials with intent to steal them (his admission, not my insinuation) and then he grabbed more than he could read in a lifetime and got lost. Whistleblowing looks different, try reading about others who did it, you'll spot glaring differences. Word for Snowdens of this world is "traitor."
Troll 2.0 Fear my asocial networking!
Rumours circulate that most if not all of the hard drives that Snowden had with him upon his flight to Hong Kong were decoys.
Decoy to fool who for what purpose?
I think the news in the OP clearly shows were Snowden's loyalties lie. He is a stooge and probably a traitor.
If you believe this video I have a tower in the center of Paris that I want to sell you.
Am I really the only person in Slashdot that believe this video is highly manipulated?.
The video looks like an original Starcraft message from your troops, the same video loop with different audio: "Yes, Sir", or "Affirmative", "Moving" or "Absolutely", "Ready to rule out", "Orders received".
The video looks like a loop taking fragments of another video, removing the background, badly(look at the shoulders), and then doing some blending in order to look "convincing" with the words.
I have experience doing video work and this is a very badly done work, I could do better on a weekend with my imac, but somewhat it deceives thousands of slashdotters.
Snowden called in to Jimmy Fallon's show last night from his hotel room. Today's version was what Putin requested from the intelligence services with proper court oversight. Kind of like those interviews Weird Al used to do, but with proper court oversight.
I agree. I expect it will lead to hundred of thousands, if not millions of deaths.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
Absolutely. A huge part of spycraft is keeping the other side in the dark about what you actually know and how you know it.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
We *did* see revelations in the press: WaPo and the Guardian know more stuff than they've published, and redact things. They won a Pulitzer recently.
Good point, so how often should "blowing the whistle" require all that much filtering? I'm going with what the GP said, "document dump".
Well, yeah, the Georgian prez nailed it. One paragraph in a diplomatic cable. One man's opinion. This is what you call "the entire Crimean plan"?
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
The opportunity to ask Putin about surveillance... Surely Putin could be lying, who knows...
And yes, it was likely staged, Snowden was likely asked to ask the question and told specifically what to ask.
But getting the answer is still worth while, sure Putin could go back on his word. But the more he does that the more he is going to lose credibility.
You can catch someone lying if you don't ask the questions you expect them to lie about.
That said, Russia properly doesn't have the resources to do the same scale of surveillance, if so mr-former-KGB would probably implement it.
Could you please enlighten me on what those "wrong reasons" are and also provide me with citations and or some kind of recorded evidence of your meetings with Snowden where he revealed those reasons to you? Thanks!
If you recall, Snowden got trapped in Russia while passing through. He didn't choose Russia, circumstances forced him to stay. He probably didn't have much of a choice regarding this 'interview' either.
(captch: yawner)
You steal the docs, you're responsible for their provenance afterward. Not a hard concept.
Further: we all agree he handed them over to the Russians, right?
I see I'm arguing with subhumans.
Debate over -- I win.
Futurist Traditionalism
You're denying he handed it over to the Russians? You lie.
Futurist Traditionalism
You're right -- I've confused the two. Snowden was the one who took it and leaked it all to the Russians, in addition to leaking several hundred times more than was necessary to prove his point.
Thus... my point stands, although a minor technical error did occur.
I note none of these fanboys admitted that he leaked all of it to the Russians.
Wonder why they "forgot"?
Futurist Traditionalism
I watched Snowden's recorded question and Putin's response on Russia Today, and neither part was terribly remarkable. I certainly don't view Snowden any less for doing this. His question was legit.
Snowden plainly stated in this phone-in that mass surveillance has been ruled and determined several times in the USA to be ineffective. He then went on to plainly ask if Russia surveils ordinary citizens and to comment on its effectiveness. That was it.
Putin responded by saying Russia's special forces can "stalk" people only by court order and need special equipment to do so. He then joked that Russia doesn't have nearly as much money as the US to perform blanket mass surveillance (this I believe, considering the ridiculous server farms we have here for such a purpose) and that he hopes it never comes to pass in the future.
Granted, Snowden wasn't allowed to physically appear and play hardball, but his question was more posed as a statement about blanket spying. Putin didn't exactly deny that spying over ordinary communications channels was happening in Russia.
AccountKiller
It really is tiresome reading these stupid attacks on Russia. The suggestion that Snowden's question was 'canned' is, frankly, rather stupid. If Putin was running an American style surveillance state, he certainly wouldn't welcome questions about it. One does have to wonder, if the US regime is actually paying people to write these propaganda comments - after all they do have a history of doing so.
One should remember, that it is the United States IS the most pervasive surveillance state ever created. It is the United States that lacks any form of meaningful democracy. It is the United States that is endemically corrupt. It is the United States that has problems with human rights, unjust imprisonment, a massive prison population, and suppression of dissent.
Having been to both countries, it was the United States that shocked me as being the place where there was least political debate, and the people had the most insular views. Russians are far more aware of the problems in their own country, and far more cynical about the failings of their leadership. America is just a propaganda land.
In the case of Snowden, it certainly did not benefit the Russians to give him asylum. At least the Russian authorities protected him from the nasty regime in Washington, who would have no doubt persecuted him, for exposing the abuses, and rampant criminality, right at the heart of the US regime.
While Russia has its problems,
> No choice my foot.
Don't forget to take it out of the mouth when you're done. With... whatever.
I hope you'll be one of them. The world needs less idiots.
Hello? That isn't an act of terrorism, it's a planned mass murder - nothing more, nothing less. Or at least it would be if the term wasn't hijacked lately.
Also where did you get the information that "Terrorist groups have changed their communication methods since Snowden's leaks..."? Made up on the spot _or_ "leaked" from NSA? We know from reliable sources that terrorists have used very sophisticated communication for a long time with the leadership often only being accessible indirect by technical means (using human couriers) making tracking them via RF hard or impossible. We know that using one-way communication, disposable mobile phone and steganographic techniques have been used. We know that standard, reliable communication techniques like dead drops and reliable encryption have been used.
The revelations are showing that we are much closer to the 1984 scenario than even some paranoid groups thought possible.
At the very least they could have told Ukraine, who seems to have been totally taken by surprise.
Also, if we're talking "treason", allowing Russia (or any we're-not-even-hiding-it-totalitarian state) to move their positions forward without opposition is something like treason towards humanity. Why are there not carrier groups in the Black Sea and the Baltic right now, "on maneuver". Or are we just going to allow Russia to annex the Baltic states as well? What about Finland, Poland or Sweden? France? When is it time to put the foot down?
How inappropriate to call this planet Earth, when clearly it is Ocean.
They changed it after the US closed its embassies then revealed the information came from intercepting the phone conversation of Al Qaeda leaders. This happened a few weaks after Snowden. The white house and the NSA revealed operational info that was far more classified than what Snowden ever revealed. This is the leak that damaged the future collection of information. But it made the government look good so no one was charged for leaking that information.
would it have been different?
Exactly what did Snowden disclose to foreign governments that they couldn't know without him? Do you really think people in those governments are _that_ dumb?
Your grateful that he damaged the security of your country, the UK? Sad.
He improved the security (and, more importantly, the freedom) of my country, the UK, by some of the damaging behaviour of those working for government. Good for him.
Only one man ever went into Parliament with honest intentions, and we ironically celebrate him every year.
Somehow you managed to either misunderstand or get wrong nearly all the important points you tried to make.
The A & B example I showed wasn't an illustration of terrorism but of the effect of different levels of information and how they could influence choices of action. How did you both miss and misuse that?
The information about terrorist groups changing communications methods has been in the news on multiple occasions. It wasn't "made up on the spot," you are simply uninformed. And for some reason the logic does not occur to you than when the media says the intelligence agencies watch X that terrorists and others might avoid X. I don't see how you can do that.
What we know from reliable sources is that only the highest levels of the terrorist hierarchy, the senior commanders, that provide high level guidance have generally been protected by the more advanced and labor intensive methods, but the lower levels that actually have to get things done according to some sort of schedule not so much. The lower levels have been much more vulnerable to having their communications intercepted, but Snowden has been tutoring them through the media on the things to avoid.
Snowden's leaks only show technical capability for intercepting communications, what they don't show is the machinery of repression and mass active monitoring that 1984 would require.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
They didn't, apparently, as they were eager to get their hands on him.
Either that, or he was their designated source.
Futurist Traditionalism
So the higher level terrorists know enough about the system to avoid being compromised, but they dont tell their underlings how to do it what to look out for or be careful of etc. Instead they leave it up to Snowden and anything they may overhear in the media (if they happen to be watching/reading western media)
No wonder the terrorists are doing so poorly.
Oops,I suppose I shouldnt have told the terrorists how they can avoid being detected (for the extra thick terrorists - by asking your leaders why they arent being rounded up but you are)
Is that really the best you can do in understanding the issue? Or are you simply trolling?
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
1. Some terrorists already know because they aren't getting caught.
2. Those terrorists could tell their friends, no need for Snowden or media.
The revelation isn't that the terrorists are being monitored, they already knew
the senior commanders, that provide high level guidance have generally been protected by the more advanced and labor intensive methods
The fuss is about the NSA spying on everybody else with little to no oversight or regards to the law.
Your attempt to make it seem like the terrorists learnt something new is just noise to distract everyone to the true crime here.
There are more sanctuary countries than Russia. Also, he opted to take the full unencrypted archive with him.
All of this was drama to cover up his desire to release the files to Russia. Now he's on TV, obviously repeating a Putin script.
He's Kim Philby the second and nothing more.
Futurist Traditionalism