Slashdot Mirror
Declassified Report From 2009 Questions Effectiveness of NSA Spying
schwit1 writes: With debate gearing up over the coming expiration of the Patriot Act surveillance law, the Obama administration on Saturday unveiled a 6-year-old report examining the once-secret program code-named Stellarwind, which collected information on Americans' calls and emails. The report was from the inspectors general of various intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
They found that while many senior intelligence officials believe the program filled a gap by increasing access to international communications, others including FBI agents, CIA analysts and managers "had difficulty evaluating the precise contribution of the [the surveillance system] to counterterrorism efforts because it was most often viewed as one source among many available analytic and intelligence-gathering tools in these efforts."
"The report said that the secrecy surrounding the program made it less useful. Very few working-level C.I.A. analysts were told about it. ... Another part of the newly disclosed report provides an explanation for a change in F.B.I. rules during the Bush administration. Previously, F.B.I. agents had only two types of cases: "preliminary" and "full" investigations. But the Bush administration created a third, lower-level type called an "assessment." This development, it turns out, was a result of Stellarwind.
They found that while many senior intelligence officials believe the program filled a gap by increasing access to international communications, others including FBI agents, CIA analysts and managers "had difficulty evaluating the precise contribution of the [the surveillance system] to counterterrorism efforts because it was most often viewed as one source among many available analytic and intelligence-gathering tools in these efforts."
"The report said that the secrecy surrounding the program made it less useful. Very few working-level C.I.A. analysts were told about it. ... Another part of the newly disclosed report provides an explanation for a change in F.B.I. rules during the Bush administration. Previously, F.B.I. agents had only two types of cases: "preliminary" and "full" investigations. But the Bush administration created a third, lower-level type called an "assessment." This development, it turns out, was a result of Stellarwind.
How much did that report cost? I could have given it to them in 2 words, for free:
Q: "Is unconstitutional warrantless spying effective?"
A: "Fuck no."
1) Tell us that it is not effective; thus we need not worry about loss of privacy; thus we might we well let them continue ?
2) It is not effective because they have not got enough money for XXX; so: please Mr congress critter - vote them some more money
3) It is not effective; you need not worry about encrypting your communications; hopefully enough idiots will believe that!
Pick one of the above or come out with more suggestions.
This was originally released heavily redacted.
The heavily redacted version read like "everything is fine"
Snowden leaks include the NSA director generals contribution to that report, it shows everything is not fine.
So they release a less redacted version, which says (paraphrased) "we knew it was illegal, it was all Yoo's fault (and a few other rogue spooks)".
Thank you Snowden. So how many other programs are also illegal and also ongoing? Any others of you lot have the guts to step forward? Especially in the UK which is like BND on steroids.
The NSA has one big issue. It takes in far too much irrelevant data and has to filter through too much of it. Its the lazy way of monitoring for the data you really want. It likes the Police searching for a subject in the whole US instead of narrowing it down to a State, County or even City. The unfortunate thing is the NSA treats all data like a potential threat for fear of being accused of profiling certain groups, race or nationality. How wrong it is to concentrate on who actually hates America rather then on most US citizens who respect and are proud to live here. I mean, you can easily see who in America is not on our side. Look at those who joined ISIS or attempted to join. Look at the people who openly declare their hate for America. Seems like these are the threats. The NSA may have started out with good intentions. But it wanted too much information and when it got it. Now it is overwhelmed with junk data that it can't find anything relevant anymore.
1) Collect extensive intelligence from phone calls and internet activity of all Americans
2) Don't tell other agencies about it
3) ???
4) PROFIT!
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
http://video.pbs.org/video/236... The recent Frontline documentary "American Terrorist" (which investigates American-born David Coleman Headley and his involvement in the Mumbai assault and the thwarted attack on a Danish newspaper) seemed to reach a similar conclusion. It was originally touted as an NSA bulk data collection success story by high level officials, but they had to backpedal as the truth emerged.
The conclusion seems to be that while they are able to collect a vast amount of information, they are unable to process and analyze all of the information gathered and connect it to individuals that warrant investigation. And Headley was extremely messy in many situations (e.g. directly contacting wanted terrorist leaders) where others certainly are not--so messy that my confidence in the NSA's abilities has diminished (this is assuming bulk data collection is a good thing to begin with, and I don't think it is). The data collected mainly became useful *after* an incident rather than being used to thwart an attack.
Perhaps things have changed by now as this is an investigation of something that happened several years ago, but I highly recommend the documentary.
There is simply no way human beings can sort through that much data. That means relying on gadgets and software to do the sorting for the humans. Anyone who manages big data can tell you how corrupt most data sets really are. Names spelled different ways, bits of information incorrectly transcribed, copy errors, format errors, import errors are all low probability events but, when you're dealing with billions of records, there are a lot of them. Just in general, gadget security doesn't work.
In nearly every terrorist event that's happened in the U.S., the FBI had tips from alert citizens. That was true for 9/11 and almost all of them in between. The FBI even interviewed the Boston Marathon bombers. HUMINT works.
Funny that the FBI screw ups don't get more media attention. In nearly every case they didn't effectively use the information they had, so how is more information going to make things better?
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
The summary seems to indicate that the value of "Stellarwind" wasn't clear because it was one of many sources and few had access to it, not that all NSA spying was seen as ineffective.
The NSA does so much spying that it seems like it would be hard to ever calculate the marginal value of each additional unit of spying. Probably more so because of the fragmentary and unreliable nature of clandestine information and the need to develop multiple sources to achieve any kind of confidence about a particular conclusion or piece of information.
The latter bit is probably what leads to never-ending development of new data sources and methods, especially as each new spying method becomes less and less specific and requires more and more analysis to tease out information. Call metadata doesn't tell you what was discussed or necessarily who was called. You need parallel data from some other source to tell you who is associated with those numbers, where they were, etc.
The program is un-constitutional and therefore needs to be dismantled and the people responsible for it tried for treason. The issue of effectiveness is separate and irrelevant.
The report says what GP said
1) The program was done according to the law (whether you like the law is another matter).
2) It was used in conjunction with several other intelligence streams so it was difficult to quantify how effective it was.
1) Tell us that it is not effective; thus we need not worry about loss of privacy; thus we might we well let them continue ?
2) It is not effective because they have not got enough money for XXX; so: please Mr congress critter - vote them some more money
3) It is not effective; you need not worry about encrypting your communications; hopefully enough idiots will believe that!
The program is both effective and ineffective, and it largely depends on two factors:
A. Sensitivity of the targets as based on political correctness score-card
B. Objection / Directive from Oval Office
The NSA program is largely ineffective against the REAL terrorists, ie, the Moslems
For example:
The 2009 Fort Hood shooting whereby a Moslem soldier, Nidal Malik Hasan, who was already known to the authority for his fundamentalist views, was allowed to continue operate inside Fort Hood (with his weapons)
It is not that the spooks had nothing on that guy. It was that because that guy being a Moslem, and anything that relates to 'Islam' is viewed to be 'sensitive' to the Oval Office, nothing was done to remove that threat, resulting in the death of 13 soldiers and injuries to more than 30 others
On the other hand, NSA's spying is very effective on other fronts, especially against its own (mainly Christian) citizens - for, again, we need to thank the Oval Office for concentrating their effort to spy on those who are more conservative Christian-oriented, who are not exactly in 'friendly term' with those who support the 'LGBT' movement
In other words, NSA has been used by the so-called 'secular' camp in the Oval Office (with the help of powerful figures such as Dianne Feinstein, Carolyn Maloney, Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates
There's always going to be an optimal balance between information and cognition. Our problem now is that we are gathering too much information for any automated or natural cognition equipment to handle in a useful way. If the NSA were made up of smarter people, they would be focusing far more heavily on AI and crowd-cognitive analysis techniques using humans, not big data.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Usually when it comes to the whole security show spiel, there's little, if any, relevant information going public. Especially when it shows that the whole crap is just a big, useless black hole for pork barrel money. How often and how long have we been asking for anything that shows the whole TSA annoyance has anything coming close to resembling having a positive effect on security?
But suddenly we get such a report without even asking for it? C'mon. What crony didn't pay his kickback in time so his project has to be axed?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It is effective at gathering data on domestic political opponents. And ex-lovers. And whatever class du-jour is on the outs.
They want to further the spying agenda, outlaw encryption and p2p technology because spying needs centralised servers (e.g. skype had to move to a centralized model), and want more funding. Gimme money money money. Ha, and they want to leer over your naked teen photos every time she crosses the border with her mobilel. And the code of your bank accounts and your emails too.
... why then that moslem soldier Nidal Malik Hasan was allowed to possess deadly firearm, despite his extreme Jihadist views, which had already been known to the 'intelligence agencies', including NSA and DIA?
If not for the 'political correctness' the 13 American soldiers didn't have to die
Furthermore, Nidal Malik Hasan is not the only moslem terrorism that happened under the watch of the current administration --- The Boston Marathon Bombing, in which 2 moslems planted bombs resulted in innocent bystanders died and injured --- the pair of moslem brothers, especially the older guy, had already been questioned by the authority
They let him loose not because they had nothing on him --- they let him loose because of he being a moslem, and to the 'political correctness' people, Islam is a 'sensitive' item, and the moslems must not be harassed in any way, not even when they pose dangers to the American public
On the other hand, the same administration think nothing to harrass the Christians --- the IRS harassment against the Christian NGOs is but one of the many examples of the anti-Christian mindset of the secular (liberal) administration
just like the DEA. Nothing is going to stop it now....
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Commenters above have talked about the signal/noise problem, and they're right, but I don't think anyone has talked about why this problem exists. I have no direct evidence, but I'd bet that after 9/11, there was a high-level conversation in the administration something like this:
"There might be terror cells all over the US, and we might be hit again! Can the NSA watch the electronic communications of all Muslims in the US?"
"Sure, but we can't be sure of knowing who they all are. Besides, it would be considered discrimination to only surveil Muslims. If that ever got out, there would be charges of "racism" and it would complicate things with Saudi Arabia."
"Right, we can't admit that there's a religious war being waged against us. Better to just surveil everyone. Can you do that?"
"Um, sure, but we'll need a really big budget increase."
"Done."
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
Show me a "terrorist" coming at me in my city, my neighborhood, or at my front door...
and I'll show you a dead body killed with my own gun.
Show me a bunch of buildings flattened by "terrorists" in my city and filled with my dead homies...
and I'll show you some kickass funeral parties, new family being born, new friends being made,
new business making bank, and those buildings rebuilt from the ground up in six months flat.
That's *MY* Patriot Act.
I don't need my jackass government trying to scare me into giving them any
more power over me and my peoples with their boogeyman rhetoric.
I *AM* the Patriot Act.
My government is the real terrorist, both overseas and at home.
Ashcroft was ready to resign over it. He was hospitalized and incapable of acting as AG. James Comey, his deputy, showed up in the hospital room that night. Alberto Gonzalez (at the time, the White House's lawyer, no DoJ affiliation) was racing to get to the hospital to get Ashcroft to sign off on it. Ashcroft refused.
The story reads like an episode of 24. The tl;dr is that the Administration hired its own lawyers Yoo and Gonzalez to tell them it was legal. Then tried to browbeat an incapacitated Attorney General into signing off on it. Then, when that didn't work, pressured his deputies to sign off on it. John Mueller, then head of the FBI, also freaked out when he heard about STELLARWIND:
> Comey testifies that there was something of a line to resign that day: Mueller; then Comey's chief of staff; and then Ashcroft's chief of staff -- who asked only that Comey wait until "Ashcroft was well enough to resign with me"
- http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2007/05/pulling_the_plug.single.html
That's not American jurisprudence, that's not even Russian jurisprudence. What happened in that hospital in 2004 was on a par with Soviet-tier "jurisprudence." Then it was legalized in 2007 because nobody in Congress was allowed to know what they were legalizing. And it's been with us ever since.
We have seen too many incidents of outrageous police conduct lately and it surely indicates that a lot more outrageous police conduct takes place. Maybe it is high time for the public to invest in a lot more hidden cams designed not just to catch criminals but bad cops as well. The single most vital thing we could do as a society is to allow voice recording almost everywhere. bribes and corruption flourish when laws exist making it illegal to record conversations. If we simply had access to every single conversation that our people in congress have we would have a much better nation. The same is true inside businesses. A great deal of evil goes on in businesses. How useful would it have been to be able to recover conversations going on in the tobacco companies back in the 1950s? Millions of lives could have been saved in that one example alone. In the end the public really doesn't want justice.
I sure hope the Obama administration puts two and two together and realizes how wasteful mass surveillance programs are and try to end them.
SPOILER: They will not.
Any report that questions the effectiveness of unconstitutional NSA bulk spying will be declared terrorist weapons. Anyone making such a report will be deemed a terrorist. Anyone reading such a report will be considered to have given aid and comfort to terrorists. Anyone recommending, sharing, or talking about such a report will be considered a terrorist convert.
Now, which terrorist law will you be confessing to today, comrade?
when you realize you have been marked for something bad there is no point in even running anymore, take the shit for a joy ride, or break.