Slashdot Mirror


Snowden's Leaks Didn't Help Terrorists

HughPickens.com writes The Intercept reports that contrary to lurid claims made by U.S. officials, a new independent analysis of Edward Snowden's revelations on NSA surveillance that examined the frequency of releases and updates of encryption software by jihadi groups has found no correlation in either measure to Snowden's leaks about the NSA's surveillance techniques. According to the report "well prior to Edward Snowden, online jihadists were already aware that law enforcement and intelligence agencies were attempting to monitor them (PDF)." In fact, concerns about terrorists' use of sophisticated encryption technology predates even 9/11.

Earlier this month former NSA head Michael Hayden stated, "The changed communications practices and patterns of terrorist groups following the Snowden revelations have impacted our ability to track and monitor these groups", while Matthew Olsen of the National Counterterrorism Center would add "Following the disclosure of the stolen NSA documents, terrorists are changing how they communicate to avoid surveillance." Snowden's critics have previously accused his actions of contributing from everything from the rise of ISIS to Russia's invasion of the Ukraine. "This most recent study is the most comprehensive repudiation of these charges to date," says Murtaza Hussain. "Contrary to lurid claims to the contrary, the facts demonstrate that terrorist organizations have not benefited from the NSA revelations, nor have they substantially altered their behavior in response to them."

38 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. Biggest joke a hundred years later by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Someone risked everything to reveal to the public what an asshole your government is, yet you wouldn't believe him and you call him traitor, and you make up thousands of reason explaining why your government has to be an asshole, despite that you really don't really believe it is.

    American people are insane. Perhaps they deserve it.

    1. Re:Biggest joke a hundred years later by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Regardless of what else you think he is, he is clearly also a Patriot.

      FTFY

  2. Re:Duh Snowden was a stalking horse. by Githaron · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Irrelevant to what? His stated purpose was to make the public aware of what the NSA was doing so that there can be a public discussion rather than a backroom one. For that purpose, his leaks are highly relevant,

  3. It it never had much effect on terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow what a surprise, who would have thought that terrorists where carefull with their communications?

    So its clear then that the NSA was doing this for economical reasons, getting better trade agreements, giving US companies a competitive advantage and such.

    Countries should investigate their trade agreements and find how much they lost due to NSA spying and demand trade agreements where the difference is calculated in favor of those other countries. So yes then Snowden did harm US interest, but unless you thing the US are gods and everyone else puny slaves, that's a good thing.

  4. At some point us intelligence changed by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I have a problem with US intelligence organizations(and I do), it's that their mission transformed from being pragmatic and getting useful, accurate assessments to military and law enforcement branches in the US to being paranoid about the theoretical possible threats that might exist to US interests in some way shape or form.

    That paranoia fuels some of the worst excesses, like universal monitoring, or toppling democracies that might potentially ally with other nations.

    1. Re:At some point us intelligence changed by kilfarsnar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If I have a problem with US intelligence organizations(and I do), it's that their mission transformed from being pragmatic and getting useful, accurate assessments to military and law enforcement branches in the US to being paranoid about the theoretical possible threats that might exist to US interests in some way shape or form.

      That paranoia fuels some of the worst excesses, like universal monitoring, or toppling democracies that might potentially ally with other nations.

      While I agree, I'm not sure how much of a transformation happened. If you look at the origins of the CIA, they were about making the world safe for American business pretty much from the beginning. That's not all they did, or do of course. But Allen and John Foster were Wall Street lawyers after all.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  5. Liars are liars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Based on past behaviour, I won't believe anything NSA and their buddies say. Anything.

    1. Re:Liars are liars. by kilfarsnar · · Score: 2

      Based on past behaviour, I won't believe anything NSA and their buddies say. Anything.

      Yeah, pretty much. They have shown themselves to be inveterate bullshitters.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  6. The sad part is... by Dega704 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No matter how conclusively this is proven, these idiot officials will continue to use Snowden as their scapegoat.

    1. Re:The sad part is... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The report is a lie.

      Terrorist groups have absolutely changed their behaviors and communications patterns to increase obfuscation and move attention away from their important operations. The United States National Security Agency, the US Military, and other terrorist operations have added increased layers of misdirection to better cover and draw attention away from their most critical activities.

    2. Re:The sad part is... by Phreakiture · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think they're idiots. I think that they think we are idiots.

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
    3. Re:The sad part is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why should we do that?

      The video(s) and cables that were leaked contained information that should have been public knowledge.
      The video of the US military accidentally killing a reporter, after it denied the event to the news agency that the reporter worked for.
      The war logs with exact real numbers of civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
      Who we are holding in GITMO, and why they were detained illegally.
      Selected State Department cables -- which played a role in bringing about the arab spring... To bad none of the revolutions seemed to have brought about lasting change.

      Which of these do you think we didn't have a right to know?

    4. Re:The sad part is... by houghi · · Score: 2

      He did something way worse than just helping terrorist. He embaressed the wrong people.

      Even if he would have given a cure for hunger and a way to get worldpeace and how to live long and prosper and interstar travel, he would still be a scapegoat, because he embaressed the school bully.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    5. Re:The sad part is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      3. [Whoosh]

    6. Re:The sad part is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They know for a fact most of "us" are complete idiots and/or too busy to give a shit about reality. Both are accurate. Go just try and talk to people about the corrupt government, the banks, crops, terrorism, the war on drugs, Afghanistan, or literally any single thing about which there are hundreds of books, articles, websites, reports, documentaries, and investigations these days. Most of them are completely ignorant or even if they actually did research, don't know shit, and vehemently defend their stupidity.

    7. Re:The sad part is... by NotSanguine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "... right to know?"

      You made that right up. There is no such thing as a right to know.

      There is such a thing though, as the right to be free of illegal search and seizure. That's difference between Snowden and Manning. A big one.

      Actually, as Americans we have many rights not enumerated in the constitution. That was one of the arguments against implementing the "Bill of Rights" at the dawn of our Republic. Many were concerned that if we enumerated specific rights, it would be assumed that those were all there were.

      That is not the case. The US constitution limits the power of the Federal government. It does *not* restrict the rights of the citizens. In fact, the Ninth Amendment clearly spells that out:
      The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    8. Re:The sad part is... by Solandri · · Score: 2

      Both sides are likely lying.

      You don't acknowledge damage when you're in a state of combat. That's just giving away intelligence to the enemy for free. It's like when CBS reported the exact location of Iraq's first scud missile strike against Israel. Why would you freely give the enemy information verifying their attack worked and thus help them improve future attacks? That's just stupid.

      The people claiming Snowden's disclosures have compromised intelligence gathering methods are either committing treason by confirming to the enemy that their obfuscation methods are working, or know that it hasn't and are lying through their teeth to misdirect the enemy, or don't know anything and are lying by pretending to know in order to score political points.

      Likewise, the people claiming Snowden's disclosures haven't compromised intelligence are either committing treason by confirming to the enemy that their obfuscation methods have been unsuccessful and they need to try something else, or know that it has a has and are lying through their teeth to misdirect the enemy, or don't know anything and are lying by pretending to know in order to score political points.

      I tend to believe anybody who really knows is also smart enough to know not to reveal that info (and not commit treason) and are keeping their mouth shut. And so anybody who's claiming "with certainty" one way or the other is likely lying.

    9. Re:The sad part is... by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      The report just says they didn't release or adopt any new encryption tools in a short timeframe associated with the leaks.

      To meet the standard in the report, they would have had to have had more secure communication tools at the ready, but not deployed. They would have had to have known their security sucked, but have been communicating that way anyways, waiting for somebody to tell them that the NSA was listening so they would know to push the "super secret" button before talking, or something.

      The report isn't a "lie" exactly, it is just totally full of shit.

    10. Re:The sad part is... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      That's stupid.

      If the terrorists changed their tactics, and you state that they've changed their tactics, you're revealing that the terrorists took action in response to finding out you've been monitoring them. If their new tactics made them vanish, made them hard to read (encryption), or did nothing, you would still notice: you'd notice them disappear if they completely beat you, or you'd notice their tactics change if their new tactics were just as ineffective as the old ones. As you say, giving terrorists information which they act on does help them, even if their response doesn't gain them anything; so saying in public that the Snowden leak helped terrorists, in any situation where they responded to the leak by change, is both accurate and not revealing.

      If you confirm that the leaks haven't helped the terrorists, then you're only confirming that the situation hasn't changed. This would only happen if the terrorists didn't gain enough information from the leaks to make any changes--useful or otherwise--and thus you would confirm exactly what the terrorists know: that they don't know if there are any leaks, what the extent of the leaks are, and where those leaks may be. This is, again, unhelpful.

    11. Re:The sad part is... by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

      Actually, as Americans we have many rights not enumerated in the constitution.

      All of that being true, there is still no "right to know" when applied to "everything that everyone in the government knows". For example, there is no "right to know" that the ambassador from some certain country is a dick and the best way to deal with him is to scratch his back a lot before asking for anything. What do you learn from that, and what does it benefit you to know? On the other hand, the idea that he's a dick is really counterproductive to future negotiations but is good to know so those negotiations can be productive.

      And that kind of information is some of the really secret stuff that we all had a "right to know" from the Wikileaks documents.

      Point taken. However, as Americans, we do have a right to audit our government and the actions of its officials. Too much of what is being done in our names (and everything the US Government does is done in the name of US citizens) is hidden from us. Especially the power grabs by the government (including warrantless surveillance, secret courts and widespread curtailment of individual liberties), the gross incompetence of various public servants, and the lies and obfuscation used to cover them up.

      As you pointed out, it probably isn't politic to reveal our foreign policy strategies and/or tactics for dealing with foreign governments. Despite that, on balance, I'm glad Snowden made these documents public, as they've clearly shown the disdain that our government has for its people and for the ideals and institutions that make us a nation.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    12. Re:The sad part is... by towermac · · Score: 2

      A Snowden demonizer recently said on these boards, that the act of leaking secrets like these two did, is the ultimate act of arrogance. I do agree with that statement.

      In Snowden's case, each and every secret he leaked (with one possible exception that may have been better kept secret) is an obvious violation of the Constitution. So while his initial act could be called arrogant, in the end; he's right, and the entire US government is actually in the wrong. That makes the arrogant label less accurate than the term; 'wise'.

      In Manning's case, while there were a couple of nuggets there that should not have been covered up, on the whole; he was very wrong to leak all that. Not even close to worth it, if you value anything about sitting here free, able to post on these boards. Two of among many things that exist because of the government we built. His arrogance remains arrogance, in addition to ignorance, and a self-absorbed attitude that almost makes me jealous. :)

      As to Snowden's wisdom, he did pull it off; blowing these secrets out of the water with very little direct collateral damage. The indirect damage of our software industry going in the global shitcan, and other fallout; not his fault. Don't shoot the messenger. I wanted to know this, because our highest law is being broken. And not by bad guys; by us.

      As an aside, I'll bet a dollar that Snowden gave himself a 50/50 chance of ending up in Leavenworth or Ecuador, and did not envision becoming stuck in Moscow. I was also surprised at the speed with which the US was able to get the planet to fall in line with revoking his passport and ground him where he was. (Snowden haters: Of course he had to go through Moscow to get to any country that would have protected him from extradition). Or the other possibility, is that Moscow is the only place on the planet in 2014 that is reasonably safe from agents of the US government. That sounds so Tom Clancy, but if true, then Snowden was smart enough to know it.

      I should get started on that statue...

  7. Then please stop snooping on us by javilon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Following the disclosure of the stolen NSA documents, terrorists are changing how they communicate to avoid surveillance."

    Then please stop the surveillance. It doesn't work with the terrorists since they have changed how they communicate and you only get communications from innocent citizens.

    --


    When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
    1. Re:Then please stop snooping on us by Thanshin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Following the disclosure of the stolen NSA documents, terrorists are changing how they communicate to avoid surveillance."

      Then please stop the surveillance. It doesn't work with the terrorists since they have changed how they communicate and you only get communications from innocent citizens.

      You still don't get it. The terrorists who are changing how they communicate to avoid surveillance are us. There is no such thing as "innocent citizens".

  8. The real study by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's a link to the real study, instead of some poorly written article (and hey! the summary is poorly written too!)

    Essentially their methodology was to look at two open source encryption tools (pics in the study). Releases of the encryption tools didn't become more frequent after the Snowden document release.

    This is obviously a narrow view, it doesn't mean Snowden had little effect, just that in one small area, Snowden had little effect. Terrorists could have stopped using Skype after the document release, and this study wouldn't have detected it. Furthermore, if Snowden did cause Russia to invade Ukraine, then this study wouldn't have detected it: it's not related to, and doesn't even pretend to look at Russia. That's where the poor summary comes in.

    Now, I don't think Snowden had anything to do with Ukraine, but let's at least keep our minds straight.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:The real study by Jahava · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I appreciate your summary, as it accurately summarizes my impression of the material as well. I want to piggyback off your conclusion to make a small point.

      Now, I don't think Snowden had anything to do with Ukraine, but let's at least keep our minds straight.

      As the Snowden leaks named several US technologies, techniques, and even specific targets, it seems highly likely that Russia (and other nations) found actionable information in those leaks which, when acted upon, degraded the US's ability to extract information and bolstered their security posture. Awareness of what an opponent knows about you and can do against you is information that can be leveraged to increase your changes of success and impact.

      I agree it's unlikely Snowden caused Russia to engage Ukraine or directly helped the terrorists, but I think it's naive to think those respective organizations didn't use the information he provided to strengthen their stances and hone their strategies. They'd be fools not to. To the extent that there was actionable information in those leaks, Snowden's actions helped those organizations.

  9. Complete mischaracterizaion of original report by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actual report.

    Key Findings

    While we note several caveats to our results in the conclusion section of this report, our primary findings are as follows:

            The underlying public encryption methods employed by online jihadists do not appear to have significantly changed since the emergence of Edward Snowden. Major recent technological advancements have focused primarily on expanding the use of encryption to instant messenger and mobile communications mediums.

            Aside from warning of tampered copies of “Asrar al-Mujahideen” that were deliberately infected with spyware, none of the prominent jihadi logistical units have expressed any public doubt as to the continued effectiveness of encryption methods employed in their software packages that were released prior to the Snowden leaks.

            The actual release of new jihadi-themed encryption software packages, like “Asrar al-Dardashah,” seems to have had a far more noticeable impact in terms of driving waves of interest in the subject of encryption among users of jihadi web forums than the publication of the Snowden NSA revelations in June 2013.

            Well prior to Edward Snowden, online jihadists were already aware that law enforcement and intelligence agencies were attempting to monitor them. As a result, the Snowden revelations likely merely confirmed the suspicions of many of these actors, the more advanced of which were already making use of – and developing –secure communications software.

    That's a far cry from saying "Snowden's Leaks Didn't Help Terrorists".

    Note that I'm not saying "Snowden's leaks DID help terrorists" - I'm specifically saying the report does NOT support the over-the-top headline on the article and on Slashdot.

  10. Scapegoat much? by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Funny

    Snowden's critics have previously accused his actions of contributing from everything from the rise of ISIS to Russia's invasion of the Ukraine.

    While we're at it, let's blame him for Mondays, New Coke and the Star Wars prequels and call it a day.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  11. Two groups saying two different things ... by perpenso · · Score: 2

    No matter how conclusively this is proven, these idiot officials will continue to use Snowden as their scapegoat.

    Is there a conclusion? The two groups seem to be saying two very different things.

    ".. a new independent analysis of Edward Snowden's revelations on NSA surveillance that examined the frequency of releases and updates of encryption software by jihadi groups has found no correlation in either measure to Snowden's leaks about the NSA's surveillance techniques ..."

    "... changed communications practices and patterns of terrorist groups ..."

    Communications practices and patterns seems much broader than encryption software releases and updates, the encryption software being one of many possible things. Plus what about downloads and usage, wouldn't that be a better metric than a software release/update schedule? Its not clear that the independent analysis contradicts the NSA.

  12. My fellow Americans by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 5, Funny


    I write to you today to appeal to your sense of reason.

    Our country is under attack from all fronts. Russia wants to disrupt our authority, fanatical terror groups want to blow up our buildings, atheists want to corrupt our souls.

    Make no mistake, we are at war. Having no other alternative to protect our great nation we have taken to attacking the enemy in preventative measures. We have struck at their core; their finances and funding, their territories, their freedoms, their countries, their friends, their families and their family's families.

    You may look at Edward Snowden and consider him to be a harmless; sexually confused transgendered computer professional. This of course would be what Snowden would like you to see.
    In truth he is a vicious, calculating pathological liar that will stop at nothing to destroy America (USA) as we know it.

    Not only did he endanger good men in the field he endangered law-abiding US citizens everywhere.

    To say that Edward Snowden does not have Weapons of Mass Destruction is to entertain a cataclysm that may indeed claim your lives and your children's chastity.

    Now, let's forget about this person and his fake and silly documents. We want to get back into the real business at hand, protecting the United States of America, land of the free, home of the brave (although we have the braves on reservation now).

    Thank you and god bless.

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
    1. Re:My fellow Americans by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 4, Funny


      REALLY? - I say WMDs and you are bothered by "transgender"?

      Don't talk back at me son, I'll smack you upside the head.

      --
      A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
  13. Re:Nostradamus by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

    The first poem is clearly referring to someone else.

    East of the Apennine would refer to the Arabian desert, so it's about a man who left his desert home, flew to a wet area for training, then spent time in a snowy area. He would be a great warrior, mostly using a stick-like weapon, rather than projectiles.

    Nostradamus was telling the tale from "a long time ago"; that of Luke Skywalker.

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  14. new fox news commercial by Cardoor · · Score: 4, Funny

    1) "Coming up tonight on the news @ 10... Just HOW MUCH did Edward Snowden's betrayal HELP the TERRORISTS?? A new study sheds some light!!"

    2) repeat this ad every 15 minutes all day long

    3) Run the segment for 10 seconds at the end of the broadcast, say.. 'apparently not much if at all.' assume most people miss it.

    4) profit!

  15. knew in 2006 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He does not get credit for "starting a national conversation"

    According to who, you? Im my view, he most certainly does get credit for that because it's pretty obvious that the amount of dialog has increased substantially since his revelations.

  16. Re:Duh Snowden was a stalking horse. by mi · · Score: 2

    Irrelevant to what? His stated purpose was to make the public aware of what the NSA was doing

    Irrelevant to the real — rather than potential — abuses of power by the government. For all the talk about NSA, none of the information they collected has been abused — not yet. The worst we've seen so far was the other law-enforcement agencies prosecuting people based on NSA-provided tips (and using "parallel reconstruction" to hide the tips), but none of those thus prosecuted has actually been innocent. The danger of real abuse is there, but it remains potential for the time being.

    The actual abuse of the government power has taken place in a different Federal bureaucracy — one much dearer to Statists' hearts. For some reason, none of the people fighting that have made it onto cool T-shirts yet...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  17. Old NSA jokes by Blaskowicz · · Score: 2

    I remember shortly after 911 jokes about saying "bomb", "osama" and whatever on the phone and then be tracked/recorded. The general media was often mentioning the Echelon network back then, with photographs of a masked antenna farm and some info about who runs them (US, UK, Canada, Aus, NZ).
    Since then 8 core pentiums have replaced one core sparcs, 1TB SATA hard disks replaced 10GB SCSI disks, GbaseT replaced 10baseT etc. and the mass media devolved into more of a "social media" echo chamber (that replaced the "blogosphere" in stupid journalists's minds)

    So what has changed really?

    Even the war lies issues (known before the actual 2003 invasion, not discovered after Snowden leaks) has not changed much in the conduct of US and European powers. No, those countries who opposed invasion are now on-board and they wage "humanitarian" wars to clean up after other failed "humanitarian" wars in the same areas.

  18. The view from Recorded Future by cold+fjord · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How Al-Qaeda Uses Encryption Post-Snowden (Part 1)

    Analysis Summary

    Since 2007, Al-Qaeda’s use of encryption technology has been based on the Mujahideen Secrets platform which has developed to include support for mobile, instant messaging, and Macs.

    Following the June 2013 Edward Snowden leaks we observe an increased pace of innovation, specifically new competing jihadist platforms and three (3) major new encryption tools from three (3) different organizations – GIMF, Al-Fajr Technical Committee, and ISIS – within a three to five-month time frame of the leaks.

    Washington Post: The Volokh Conspiracy - As evidence mounts, it’s getting harder to defend Edward Snowden

    --
    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
  19. Re:Duh Snowden was a stalking horse. by nine-times · · Score: 2

    Yeah, I don't want to put words in anyone else's mouth, but I feel like there's been some cognitive dissonance in response to the Snowden leaks.

    I've had conversations with people who, on the one hand, claim that what Snowden revealed couldn't possibly be helpful or meaningful, because he leaked things that "everyone already knew anyway". Meanwhile, on the other hand, they also claim that Snowden is a horrible traitor for releasing vital national secrets that threaten our safety. I feel like you can't have it both ways.

    As I see it, he took what was a conspiracy theory that few people in the USA took seriously, and turned it into fact. It would be like leaking documents that JFK was, in fact, assassinated by the CIA, and then people responded by saying, "So what? I've been hearing that rumor for years! Still, we should kill the person who leaked it because he's compromising CIA operations."

  20. Re:defined by mainstream media coverage by ahaweb · · Score: 2

    The "conversation" before Snowden was establishment voices calling people like us tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists.