Slashdot Mirror
Edward Snowden Is Not Alone: US Gov't Seeks Another Leaker
bobbied (2522392) writes Apparently Edward Snowden is not alone. CNN is reporting that recent leaked documents published by The Intercept (a website that has been publishing Snowden's leaked documents) could not have been leaked by Snowden because they didn't exist prior to his fleeing the USA and he couldn't possibly have accessed them. Authorities are said to be looking for a new leaker.
...they are the FACES we know.
Those you and I never see - are MANY more, I'm guessing thousands. It's a cat and mouse game, spy vs spy. Someone somewhere leaks something, and someone else gets assigned to find out what leaked, who leaked it and how do we close the leak and clean up after it.
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
Guys, it was me. I'm sorry, but I just can't keep a secret, which is why I revealed it, and why I had to tell you that Mrs. Jenkins across the street? The UPS man was parked there 45 minutes this morning, and he smiled coming out.
They will call the whistle blowers "TRAITORS" and they will come up with all the usual justifications - that they need to fight "terrorism", or whatever it is ...
America is turning into an extra-large-size concentration camp and still there are people wanting it to happen !
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
and the lack of meaningful change from the initial outrage,
Maybe, just fucking Maybe, Snowden's legacy will be his inspiration to leagues of others who are driven to reveal outrages instead of ignoring them like good little soldiers.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
As recently as May, shortly after he retired as NSA director, Gen. Keith Alexander denied that Snowden could have passed FISA content to journalists.
"He didn't get this data," Alexander told a New Yorker reporter. "They didn't touch --"
"The operational data?" the reporter asked.
"They didn't touch the FISA data," Alexander replied. He added, "That database, he didn't have access to."
Believable, but considering that the CIA said that nobody had access to the senate's subnet, and then it turned out that common IT workers had access AND USED IT -- and Snowden was in a similar position -- and I'd take anything said by NSA leadership with a grain of salt. Often at that level, "he didn't have access to" really means "the policies stated he shouldn't access that." It doesn't mean that it wasn't possible, just that it was outside accepted policies and procedures, and that at some point, someone SHOULD have airgapped it and added in the appropriate ACLs such that it wouldn't be possible.
But I'd believe more that Snowden was the one who escaped with the data, but there are actually a number of people who were involved in obtaining it in the first place. And now that Snowden has opened things up but prevented himself from providing other leaks, the rest have found an alternate route that didn't involve a courier in the same manner.
The thing is, if they can leak like this, that means it's just as easy for other actors to be leaking to people who might want the information but who won't tell about it. This shows that access control at the NSA is still thoroughly broken, no matter who the leak was.
Hey, we told the IT guy to change the permissions on that folder to keep himself out. He must have been some kind of super-hacker to get past us...
maybe, just maybe, Snowden is the FACE of the leaks.
Which begs the question: who are the BA, Hannibal, and Murdock of the leaks.
All of these agencies are shown to be violating the law, lying to us (and Congress) about it, and generally ignoring basic rule of law.
So, either you have to conclude that everybody who works for these agencies has bought into the Kool-Aid of fascism ... of some of them are going to realize that the surveillance state has gone way beyond what it should and is undermining everything.
This level government secrecy and abuse is a cancer, and it needs to be removed.
Quite frankly, leaking is pretty much moral obligation of anybody who has realized the extent to which these agencies have become toxic.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
If one person does it, they'll think he's a traitor.
If two people do it, they'll think they're both faggots.
If three people do it--imagine! Three people walking in, leaking information, and walking out? They'll think it's a terrorist organization.
And can you imagine 50 people walkin' in, leakin' information, and walkin' out?! They'll think it's a terrorist movement!
(Apologies to Arlo Guthrie...)
A sleeper agent would feed the docs back to another country and do everything to keep their cover and advance via decades of great US gov work.
No deep cover agent would be allowed to just become a "whistleblower" as many cleared docs are created for and tracked per staff member.
Under examination each copy can be tracked back, why risk all for one domestic database press event?
ie a mole would send unique one of a kind material to their handler and thats it.
If the source gets documents published its a whistleblower.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
You mean to say, you hired dedicated patriots, with a fundamental desire to server the public, put them through intensive training, made them take a solemn oath to uphold the constitution, then employed them and asked them to violate those very principles, and that oath... and you mean to tell me a few of them may have turned against you?
The lunacy of our federal government never ceases to astound me.
The CNN talking-head calls the leaker a "mole." WRONG.
A Federal Whistle-blower is not a "mole," but simply a whistle-blower.
This is similar to the concept of "jury nullification," whereby a jury can find an accused guilty of breaking a law, but can also recommend ZERO punishment, as jury nullification is a mechanism for citizens to nullify unjust laws.
It was used a lot in the civil-rights era, but has been buried by Attys. and judges alike, leading to a lack of awareness by potential jurors.
PS – Want to get out of jury duty? Get informed, and assert your faith in Jury Nullification in open court during voire dire.
They hate being held to account, and prefer an ignorant "jury of peers."
And log out.
And that's what it is, the Anonymous' Restaurant Anti-Censorship Whistleblowin' Movement, and all you gotta to do join is post this message the next time this article appears on the Slashdot dupe post.
With feeling.
So we'll wait for it to come around as a dupe on Slashdot here, and you can post it when it does.
Here it comes.
You can read anything you want at Anonymous' Restaurant
You can read anything you want at Anonymous' Restaurant
Exfiltrate with a simple hack,
Pop the return address from your program's stack,
And you can read anything you want at Anonymous' Restaurant.
That was horrible. If you want to limit the powers of the surveillance state and actually be able to exercise your civil liberties the way your scraggly-haired hippie parents did, you gotta post in ALL CAPS! I've been typing this post for 27 minutes, Mr. Anonymous Coward, I can type for another 27 minutes. I'm not proud. Or tired.
So we'll wait for the American voters to elect candidates who are willing to force the domestic intelligence community back into compliance with constitutional law, or at least USSID-18, by means of a 21st century Church Commission, and this time with four-part harmony and feeling.
*pause*
(Okay, so we might be waiting for a bit longer than 27 minutes...)
The UK had two Russian spies in their government: Donald Maclean and Guy Burgess . . . and Kim Philby.
Ok, their three Russian spies were: Donald Maclean, Guy Burgess and Kim Philby . . . and Anthony Blunt.
Start again. Among their Russian spies were: Donald Maclean, Guy Burges, Kim Philby, Anthony Blunt and John Cairncross . . . and . . .
Oh, bugger.
The unmasking took years to complete . . . um . . . if it was completed . . .
However there is a big difference here . . . those spies did it for Russia. Snowden did for America.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
No it doesnt. http://begthequestion.info/
Linguistic prescriptivists are always on the wrong side of history. This is to be expected, since history isn't written by losers.
Since the US media has become useless in terms of actual journalism, I don't think they care. TV based media simply ignores leaks, so the population that relies on TV media for news is just as clueless as if the leak never happened. Not a new tactic mind you, just lots easier with TV Propaganda^wNews today. They are probably betting that people will just forget. Happens all the time with Government and has for decades.
There are a few good radio stations that will talk about these issues, but none are nationally syndicated. Anything that receives lots of airtime gets bought out by Fox^wClearchannel and changed to a "Sports" station. Before you say it, Alex Jones sold out long ago and is now just a more extreme version of Rush Limbaugh (sometimes okay for scaring people awake to problems, but not often).
Newspapers? WTF is a Newspaper? Well, more seriously the few that are left are all controlled like Radio and TV.
I would be willing to bet that there are more leakers than just Snowden. If I was going to leak I may blame him since that might save me from a likely life term in "pound me up the ass prison". As long as Snowden is in Moscow he probably does not mind, it keeps him popular and relevant which I'm sure leads to a bit of income.
Having spent 10 years in the DOD I can tell you that security is possible (Not to brag, well maybe a little bit, I built the first NISPOM compliant secure networks off of a military installation). At at the time I left (8 years ago) they were trying to skimp and even offshore work. One of many reasons for me leaving mind you. Systems can be secured and audited, but it's expensive and everyone in the management and executive chain wants bigger bonus checks. Politicians want bigger kick backs, so the money train works against security as often as possible.
This shows that access control at the NSA is still thoroughly broken, no matter who the leak was.
I would have to agree, because you don't change a decade of shit security in a year. You would need to re-architect a decade worth of systems, and I'd bet a box of donuts that they just tried slapping bandaids on things.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Of course there are other leakers.
What is remarkable about Snowden is not that he was able to obtain all this "secret" information, but that he went public with it. Rather than selling it to someone like maybe one of those rich guys who are paying ISIS's way. It is some of the other "leakers" who are unquestionably doing that.
The NSA, etc, needs to be shut down. If only because it is demonstrably true that persons who make a career in climbing bureaucracies lack the kind of intelligence necessary to managing the needed level of security.
There may or may not be other good reasons for getting the government out of this kind of spying and database management. But just as it would be stupid to hire Cordon Bleu chefs to run an explosives manufacturing plant, it is stupid to put even the very best bureaucrats in charge of this kind of data collection and database management. They might be very good at what they have experience in doing, but this kind of stuff is going to blow up in everyone's face. Explosive technologies cannot be handled with cookbook methods.
The only sane course is to get USA government out of this activity. It is not something a democratically oriented bureaucracy can do. We need to look to other methods.
Will
They are NOT whistleblowers or moles... they are our nations TRUEST, in every sense of the word, Freedom Fighters.
Lets repeat that again, Freedom Fighters.
I'm not a religious man, but I'll bloody well say this. God bless you, for you are the few protecting us from the tyrants within.
I'd prefer to rephrase that last sentence a bit.
... those spies did it for a foreign, enemy power. Snowden did it for his own country.
The catch with your #2 is that the ultimate boss and owner of any data held by the US government is the US public. The constitutional foundation of their entire system of government is not "We the Government", but "We the People of the United States", no matter how much winking, nudging and outright fraud goes on in the corridors of power.
So if you found your company (government) was up to no good, and upon going up the chain got told to stick your head in the sand if you know what's good for you, I'd hope you'd strongly consider going to the police (public). And as a human being, I'd be less than impressed if someone chose their own very comfortable life over the endangered liberty of the people they'd sworn to protect.