Slashdot Mirror
New Details About NSA's Exhaustive Search of Edward Snowden's Emails
An anonymous reader points out this Vice story with new information about the NSA's search of Edward Snowden's emails. Last year, the National Security Agency (NSA) reviewed all of Edward Snowden's available emails in addition to interviewing NSA employees and contractors in order to determine if he had ever raised concerns internally about the agency's vast surveillance programs. According to court documents the government filed in federal court September 12, NSA officials were unable to find any evidence Snowden ever had.
In a sworn declaration, David Sherman, the NSA's associate director for policy and records, said the agency launched a "comprehensive" investigation after journalists began to write about top-secret NSA spy programs upon obtaining documents Snowden leaked to them. The investigation included searches of any records where emails Snowden sent raising concerns about NSA programs "would be expected to be found within the agency." Sherman, who has worked for the NSA since 1985, is a "original classification authority," which means he can classify documents as "top-secret" and process, review, and redact records the agency releases in response to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
In his declaration, Sherman detailed steps he said agency officials took to track down any emails Snowden wrote that contained evidence he'd raised concerns inside the agency. Sherman said the NSA searched sent, received, deleted emails from Snowden's account and emails "obtained by restoring back-up tapes." He noted that NSA officials reviewed written reports and notes from interviews with "NSA affiliates" with whom the agency spoke during its investigation.
In a sworn declaration, David Sherman, the NSA's associate director for policy and records, said the agency launched a "comprehensive" investigation after journalists began to write about top-secret NSA spy programs upon obtaining documents Snowden leaked to them. The investigation included searches of any records where emails Snowden sent raising concerns about NSA programs "would be expected to be found within the agency." Sherman, who has worked for the NSA since 1985, is a "original classification authority," which means he can classify documents as "top-secret" and process, review, and redact records the agency releases in response to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
In his declaration, Sherman detailed steps he said agency officials took to track down any emails Snowden wrote that contained evidence he'd raised concerns inside the agency. Sherman said the NSA searched sent, received, deleted emails from Snowden's account and emails "obtained by restoring back-up tapes." He noted that NSA officials reviewed written reports and notes from interviews with "NSA affiliates" with whom the agency spoke during its investigation.
I mean, Snowden is ahead by about 9,047 to 6.
They're sounding more and more like 5 year old's complaining to their parents.
Have some fucking accountability. Jesus.
"Helping to keep you two steps ahead of the Thought Police!"
So far, the NSA has lied (at first) about each and every little thing Snowden has leaked.
I guess on this one though, we are supposed to take them at their word.
Recall the "NSA Releases Snowden Email, Says He Raised No Concerns About Spying" (05.29.14)
http://www.wired.com/2014/05/s...
".... the NSA released a statement and a copy of the only email it says it found from Snowden.
That email, the agency says, asked a question about legal authority and hierarchy but did not raise any concerns."
Now its just about FIOA requests finding more or wondering what was held back as as the gov felt it "did not raise any concerns"....
From no emails to one email found back to none under a definition of what "identify" is going to find?
The other option is to only look for a few narrow legal terms that would constitute a formal complaint and not find one.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Oh, he swore? That's OK then. The NSA may lie, but when they swear, they always tell the truth.
NSA has proven to intentionally and knowingly lie. Their actions are criminal. Why again should we believe *anything* they say?
We should not.
I'm sorry. These folks lied to congress. They did it for years. They scanned emails of senators and then lied about it. They lied about the scope, detail, retention and duration of their program, for years, to both congress and the American public.
They have no credibility. I don't care if he is a 20 star general and is pinky-swearing it. I can't trust them. Trust is earned. Distrust is earned. They bought only distrust. They have not earned back one percent of one percent of the trust they have destroyed.
I don't care what noises come out of the mouth of the sock-puppet. It isn't capable of speaking trustworthy words.
They should be required by law to start all declarations with : "Taking into account we can lie without any consequence, ..."
Or, a more colloquial : "On this week's 'shit we just make up' : ..."
If the NSA and federal government didn't change after the info was released publicly, why are they acting like an internal complaint might have made a difference?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
If this guy gets to decide what's classified, then could he have decided that the Snowden "concern" email is classified and therefore he doesn't have to admit its existence?
Yes officer, I killed that man, dead in his tracks, bullet right in his face. But, he didn't raise any concerns over it, so really, isn't he the criminal here?
This is essentially the "I do not recall" equivalent of paperwork investigations.
The essential question here is whether the NSA can conclusively deny that Snowden never raised concerns at the agency. Since if he did raise concerns, he probably would have raised them to people personally, a document search is not nessesarily going to uncover whether he did.
What will uncover this conclusively is a simple interview of NSA and affiliate company employees and especially supervisors who worked with Snowden. But since such a set of interviews would either a) reveal that he did raise concerns, b) involve people having to sign their names to untruths, or most unlikely c) reveal he really raised nothing, then I think it's easier for the NSA to just pretend that a half-assed email server word search constitutes an appropriate investigation.
May the Maths Be with you!
This is a simple misdirection, common in many types of argument. Whether or not Mr. Snowden attempted to bring problems to anyone's attention is immaterial to the main problem, which is that the NSA was exhibiting this behavior in the first place.
Like that means anything anymore.
The NSA, with apparent approval from our gov't, spies on its own citizens with impunity, and let seem to be caught flat-footed by events unfolding the Middle East and Ukraine (at least from what I have heard on the radio)
The president twiddles his thumbs while our allies cry out for help.
What in three hells happened to our country?
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
NSA: policeman, investigator, judge and spy since 1952.
Let's make this about Snowden.
After all, if he didn't raise concerns, then how could they have possibly known there were any issues.
Perhaps the NSA should share its email recovery procedures with the IRS.
Knowing what both the NSA and Snowden claim to have known during the discourse, why would Snowden use such an insecure channel of communication as email to voice objections? Other countries' government agents would likely have taken notice if he'd used something as insecure even as "internal" email.
Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
we seriously gotta get the word out that 'news' and 'airtime' as dictated by the likes of vice (partly owned by rupert murdoch btw) is part of the problem vis-a-vis setting the terms of the conversation. Maybe /. should add a field to the data sources that with a mouseover would show all the owners of record of said data source.
In 2001, William Binney, an NSA investigator, began blowing the whistle on NSA warrantless surveillance. He went through official channels to his superiors, then to Congress, then to the major media. He was harrassed and prosecuted by the government, and ignored and maginalized by the major media. He has kept at it for the past thirteen years.
In 2010, Thomas Drake started blowing the whistle. He was also prosecuted, harrassed, ignored, and marginalized.
In 2011, Ron Wyden began warning the public about the secret interpretation of the PATRIOT Act, as loudly as he could without violating his clearance to be on the Intelligence Committee. The major media ignored him.
In 2013, when Snowden released his docs, the major media finally started listening to Binney, Drake, and Wyden. The establishment's treatment of Binney, Drake, and Wyden is why Snowden had to follow the path he did.
The President of the United States has said that these programs should change. Programs that Binney, Drake, and Wyden tried to warn us about through official channels. Programs that we still would not know about if Snowden had gone through official channels.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
If Snowden is lying or incorrect about raising concerns in "documented channels" (which may not be limited to emails, but Snowden said he sent emails), then the NSA score against his reputation and help lay the groundwork for a potential future criminal case... while failing to address the issues of massive and complete surveillance.
If Snowden is correct and this is just the spin machine hard at work, the NSA is just going to look even worse (to those paying attention) when the truth comes out. Looks like Snowden forgot to leak one thing: the records of his own internal complaints about surveillance.
Snowden was/is clearly a communist spy whose sole objective was to harm the United States. The NSA is one of a few dozen alphabet agencies that have grown out of control and drunk on their power. Smaller government means less potential for government to do evil. People should be going to jail at the IRS and the NSA. The media should be all over both of these agencies and they are not. That should scare you more than any of Snowden's revelations. Quit worshipping this weasel traitor. We can be angry at what the NSA is doing without celebrating a traitor than has and will cause good people to die with his aid to our enemies.
Perhaps actually reading into the subject at hand, and thinking about what you say might help with you getting a clearer picture. One mans weasel traitor is another mans whistleblower. Name a whistleblower the intelligence apparatus in the US hasn't condemned?
Sherman, who has worked for the NSA since 1985, said the NSA searched deleted emails from Snowden's account and emails "obtained by restoring back-up tapes" and says the techy nerd he asked to do this, the one who would be raked over coals and fired if it was found out he deleted incriminating evidence, promised that these were really all the emails that Snowden sent.
Oh, David David David... Let me try to explain this one to you: You're trusting the people in charge of the system to tell you if they tampered with the system. You can't trust them. Which is why you fired 90% of that group a little while ago.
Also, they're using tape for their email backup? I mean, I know that for bulk data, tape actually becomes cost effective at some point. But email? Is that odd?
A communist spy? For what Communist government? North Korea? Cuba? You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Given the context of your post, I would think you're just another stupid troll, only one so stupid you actually use your name in a forum such as this, which, when combined with your imbicilic ranting, makes you more of an idiot than a troll.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Wait.... if you acknowledge that the NSA is a serious internal threat that is out of control.... Why don't you think that Edward Snowden (and all the other whistle-blowers) are doing it in an effort to... you know... exert some control on the organization?
I mean, if you're wise to the NSA, then why are you believing the tale their spinning about him being a spy?
a traitor than has and will cause good people to die
Can you name one instance of someone dying because of Snowden's leaks?
Or even an official citing that someone ACTUALLY died? (as opposed to your exact complain of vague worrying about potential repercussions).
I mean, after all, Snowden didn't send an e-mail complaining about the practice, so the U.S. can proceed with hoovering up every piece of data on every citizen around the world that it can get its hands on and archiving it forever.
I wish we had something like a Constitution that addressed this situation but I'm sure our President, an ex-Con Law professor, would tell us if we did.
that the NSA cannot seem to find an email on a network they owned and monitored yet have millions more emails from networks they don't own...
Or is the length of time it has taken them to do this "exhaustive search" meant to demonstrate how minutely they invade our privacy?
With such credentials, I believe them 100% surely :p
Now if only someone would exhaustively search out HER e-mails.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
If Snowden was able to download so many documents that weren't his, you can bet that he was able to make a backup of his own e-mail. Will this be the same pattern where the NSA coughs up a lie and then finds themselves soundly contradicted a few months later?
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.
In response to a FOIA request a ProPublica journalist filed for just this kind of information last year, the NSA told him they couldn't do those kind of searches that they apparently just did. Well, dang...it's a good thing that they figured out they could, I mean gosh...if they'd just got it squared away last year then we'd have known a lot earlier how clean their hands were in all this.
http://www.washingtontimes.com... Lots of people are dying at the hands of rabid animals in Iraq and Syria and those animals are using leaked information by Snowden to evade the good guys (which by the way is us).
Really? You honestly believe that he just happened to find safe haven in Russia at the same time Putin begins stepping up his aggression against former Soviet states? Obviously the answer you are looking for is Russia. Stupid because I use my real name and you accuse me of being a troll? Which one of us hides behind anonymity? I have nothing to hide and I'm not so ashamed of my beliefs that I have to disguise who I am when I voice my opinions.
What has Snowden revealed about our intelligence gathering against Russia who is the most serious threat to the United States? >crickets What Snowden has revealed are 1) information that will turn the people against our government, military, and intelligence gathering agencies. 2) Information that will embarrass us and our allies 3) Information that will weaken our ability to gather information against our enemies 4) information that will drive a wedge between the United States and our Allies In other words everything Snowden has released is designed to weaken the United States. Where is the leaked information about the United States planting bugs in Russian embassies? Why only leaks regarding our strongest allies and not any of our enemies? I've always been against the formation of the Department of Homeland Security. I'm against our collecting mass information about the citizens of the United States. Obama has already proven that that information can and will be used against the people in order to maintain power (IRS). That does not mean we should celebrate traitors to our country. There are means to work within the system to correct it. There are avenues to get the basic information regarding illegal programs into the hands of the public without damaging our national security. Remember Watergate? Remember Iran-Contra? That information got out. Why the need to continue the constant dripping of our greatest national secrets now? And I've been in the Telecommunications and Internet industry for a long time. It has never been a secret that our intelligence agencies have taps into our communications system at least not in the industry and not in Congress. Congress passes the funding for these ventures. Congress knows and that's including the ones who are feining outrage now. CALEA is public record so you can only imagine what isn't. I have heard the stories, one in particular from a guy who worked for a major ILEC who helped facilitate the interconnection and handoffs from the central office to a government agency in California. This was 15 years ago when I heard the story. Everyone knows. If you didn't then you are willfully ignorant.
But this is a sworn declaration, and if it's a sworn declaration then it must be true because it's not like anyone has been caught lying under oath on this topic is it!
;-) SEVERAL TIMES, and to CONGRESS no less. I think the NSA has gotten so in the habit of lying that they probably don't even know how to tell the truth anymore. Their employees would require extensive training to be reintroduced to concepts like "truth," "honesty" and "transparency."
Congress is a pack of hyenas who generally do such a terrible job and lie to everyone else. Some of them are hyenas with good intentions, but still.
The moral fault is not in lying to Congress; it's probably not even in lying to the public, since there are legitimate national security concerns in "what are the breadth of our signals intelligence"-type questions. The moral fault is in having the expansive surveillance state and *not caring* about the privacy impact.
Aside from the other thread arguing that they were still guilty of unethical behavior whether anyone criticized them for it or not, there's another potential bit of misdirection here:
What if Snowden's means of raising concerns had nothing to do with e-mail and he only used verbal or hard-copy means, and the NSA knows it?
Chris Inglis was the NSAâ(TM)s deputy director who made that assertion. He specifically stated the information used was Snowden's leaks about NSA eavesdropping on social media, email and so forth. *You* stated that the knowledge that the NSA was an internet threat, out of control and that they were spying on the above mentioned was common knowledge. So, according to your very own logic, Snowden's leaks weren't the cause of those deaths you're posturing over.
So yes I do believe there were no email about Snowden's concerns regarding NSA violating the U.S. constitution. But I bet there were either interoffice memo's directed at a specific person or notes from conversations between Snowden and those he talked to. And the NSA never said anything about checking for such documents. So while most would think that the NSA saying they found not email on the subject means they checked all over the place. What it means is that they only checked email and nothing else. Plus having and organization, that is blatantly ignoring and violating the constitution, investigating themselves is the definition of conflict of interest.
We see this differently I suppose. I'll trust the interpretation of Ellesberg over your Telecom insight. If you think lying to Congress, and propaganda campaigns to ensure enough fear/support of this surveillance. You might be alright with the lying and the slight of hand three card monty word games they play, but I personally am not. If you've been aware of all of this for 15 years and the best you can say about it, is that it embarrassed the US government, then you have apparently decided that it is all OK, and in the best interests of civilians to trade peace for the lie of security. That is your path, not mine. There is nothing good in a surveillance state for the citizens being controlled... The second you suggest that exposing this to the public is a bad thing then you are actually part of the problem. You are they.
It's 100% spin. I though Snowden raised concerns internally like a decade ago. He got completely ignored. So he moved on.
It was Hayden or Clapper outright lying to congress over a year ago that pushed him into finally doing it.
Name one person killed?
Those are the same people who've lied about surveillance from the beginning. I'm *sure* that they wouldn't be lying this time!
My sig is too lon
1) information that will turn the people against our government, military, and intelligence gathering agencies.
Good. The government, military, and intelligence gathering agencies have proven they cannot be trusted and are actively working against the very people they are sworn to protect. If your wife were to literally stab you in the back, you wouldn't think "Aww, how sweet! She must really love me" unless you were a complete psychopath yourself. Do not blame the people for the government's mistakes.
2) Information that will embarrass us and our allies
Good. Maybe something will finally get done about it instead of just pretending these injustices aren't happening daily.
3) Information that will weaken our ability to gather information against our enemies
Well seeing as the government has declared that everybody is an enemy of itself, good. Any government that sees citizens as enemies is a rogue government and needs to be stopped.
Or did you mean enemies in the middle-east? You know, like the ones we trained and gave money to? The ones that aren't even using telephones specifically because they already knew that it could be tracked? Those enemies?
4) information that will drive a wedge between the United States and our Allies In other words everything Snowden has released is designed to weaken the United States.
How do you figure? They are all compliant in the matter. Even if that were the case, again, who's fault is that? You're really going to blame Snowden for the illegal and corrupt actions of the government having negative effects?
You're either living proof of a secret government brainwashing project or a shill. Frankly, I don't care which. The rest of us will be here to call you out on your bullshit and lies.
I would go with more of a convenient US annoyance Putin can keep around to poke the US government with instead of communist spy. Also if I didn't want to find out what is is like to experience extreme rendition or be sodomized by a hellfire missile Russia seem like a pretty good country to flee to.
Time to offend someone
Exactly, both Bushtards (which Obama obsessively keeps appointing, as well as neocon Hillary), Clapper and Alexander have lied repeatedly before congress, and they are the top doods, so what are their lackeys supposed to do, after all?
I never said I agree with it or that I'm alright with it. What I said is that our politicians are okay with it. Even after all the revelations by Snowden what has changed? The only thing that has changed is that the United States national security has been weakened. The programs continue. The people are ignorant sheep in this country and can get riled up and manipulated so easily that it is frightening. All it takes to make problems go away is for a leak of some nudies though so thinking that Snowden dumping the United States intelligence secrets is going to change anything is naive. The only thing it will change is the behavior of our enemies. What we can do to put the brakes on the rapid decline of the United States into a Socialist Police State is beyond me. I don't think we can anymore until it all comes apart. I used to be an optimist, but after what this administration has been able to get away with I am now a realist.
Did he flee there or retire there? Putin isn't interested in annoying the US. He is interested in rebuilding the Soviet Union period. If it doesn't further his goal of accomplishing that he isn't going to waste his time. Snowden was a Putin spy.
Snowden's so-called whistleblower information was only regarding the collection of data on US Citizens. If that was his problem why did he release information on our intelligence gathering sources and methods on foreign governments? He could have leaked the information with proof regarding the tapping at AT&T, Verizon, Google, etc without releasing information that damaged our foreign intelligence gathering. He didn't. They are two different things and the majority of what he has released and continues to release is regarding our foreign operations which are legal, legitimate, and exactly what these agencies are tasked with doing.
It's over 9000!!!!! (Comment limited to areas outside Japan, where quantities may vary...)
Really? You honestly believe that he just happened to find safe haven in Russia
Nobody believes that because that is not what happened. Of course, you have an odd, tainted memory of what only happened a year ago. I seem to recall that he was on his way to Ecuador, from China, and switched planes in Russia, at which point, our government forcefully grounded any air traffic in an attempt to get their hands on him. So... because our government locked him in Russia instead of his destination, that somehow makes him a Russian spy in your eyes? What fucking sense does that make?
Stupid because I use my real name and you accuse me of being a troll? Which one of us hides behind anonymity?
Who cares? What's your point here? You are either trolling or stupid. Some of us simply don't care to register an account for no reason. That does not, in the slightest, lend credence to your insane, and provably wrong, ideas.
I have nothing to hide
Yes you do. The very fact that you say this shows how much of an idiot you are. Of course, you won't believe it until the government fucks you over personally, because you don't give a shit when it happens to everyone else around you.
We can exhaustively search all of Snowden's emails by restoring from backup tapes but we can't find a single one of Lois Lerner's or other IRS emails because hard drives crashed?
I'll take Double Standards for $500, Alex.
"My sole motive is to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them." - Edward Snowden.
It's that "done in our name" portion. We run this gin-joint. Our spies have performed illegal operations.
He could have leaked the information with proof regarding the tapping at AT&T, Verizon, Google, etc without releasing information that damaged our foreign intelligence gathering.
That's actually quite a lot of effort that entire news corporations are STILL shuffling through. Years later. And what if he slipped up while censoring the data? You'd trust one man without a budget and a limited time-frame rather than an organization with a QA department? Or I supposed you'd rather he enter Russia with all of the NSA's as-of-yet unreleased secrets.
And do you honestly believe that anyone at the NSA could have influenced ISIS's surge to power? Really? Do you honestly believe that IF ONLY Snowden hadn't blown that whistle, then somehow the NSA would have prevented the clusterfuck in Iraq right now?
Isn't it obvious? He's working with the secret remnants of the USSR who coordinate everything from their hollowed-out volcano lair on the dark side of the moon in cooperation with the reptilian overlords. Who are also communist.
Duh.
Snowden was planning to go elsewhere when his passport was revoked. He was effectively stranded in Russia by the US government. Do you really think he orchestrated his passport getting revoked while on a stop-over between flights in Russia just so he would have a convenient excuse to stay there and not seek asylum in another country?
If the US and Britain had never invaded Iraq in an illegal war and overthrown Saddam then IS would never have got a foothold in Iraq. Saddam was an evil murderous bastard, but he did keep his country in order.
The US aren't the good guys, good guys don't start wars in violation of international law while lying their citizens about the reason for the war.