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.
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.
Open source software is often made freely available at no costs to downloaders and embedders. There is little incentive for these users to pay anything for it, including for support, since the main reason to adopt this software is to not pay at all. The result is that there are few resources for testing or documenting the software and no incentive for the developers to care about the usage by others and actively develop the software outside of their own use cases.
Further aggravating the issue is the claim by activists that the software code is reviewed by millions of people as it is freely available to anyone. The fallacy of this claim resides in the lack of interest of anyone to do this. Indeed, who would review other people's code for free or for fun? Vulnerabilities such as the Heartbleed bug are always found by using and probing the software, not by reviewing the code.
OpenSSL and the Hearbleed bug is the new poster child for the failed open source movement. No one cared, no one will care. Repeat expected.
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.
Snowden wasn't a whistleblower, he was a spy for the other side.
If he were a whistleblower, we would have seen revelations in the press, not a document dump to the public.
Not to mention a lack of taking several hard drives full of data to the Russians, who as events in Crimea show, haven't changed since the Soviet Era.
Futurist Traditionalism
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.
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*
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
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
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.
Heh, good one, Mr. Putin.
Oh wait, you were serious?
HAHAHAHA!!!
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.
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"?
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
They didn't, apparently, as they were eager to get their hands on him.
Either that, or he was their designated source.
Futurist Traditionalism
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