Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Edward Snowden: the World Says No To Surveillance

Posted by Soulskill on from the except-for-the-parts-that-say-yes dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Two years after his whistle-blowing, Edward Snowden finds that his action had profound effects on political decision making and on citizen's understanding of privacy issues. He writes in the NY Times, "In a single month, the N.S.A.’s invasive call-tracking program was declared unlawful by the courts and disowned by Congress. After a White House-appointed oversight board investigation found that this program had not stopped a single terrorist attack, even the president who once defended its propriety and criticized its disclosure has now ordered it terminated. This is the power of an informed public. ... We are witnessing the emergence of a post-terror generation, one that rejects a worldview defined by a singular tragedy. For the first time since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, we see the outline of a politics that turns away from reaction and fear in favor of resilience and reason."

22 of 176 comments (clear)

  1. Next! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I guess the "terrorists attacks" phase is over. Let's start the "aliens attacks" phase.

    Signed,
    The Illuminati.

  2. People are claiming a victory where there is none by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I feel like they're sensationalizing what is essentially a game of musical chairs -- the data is still being collected (by law). The spying is still happening.

  3. I can agree to that... by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Mr. Snowden, love him or hate him, actually did a service to the world by pointing out something that, if left ignored, would have rivaled the old East German Stasi in scope and reach (well, if it hasn't already. Hint: It probably has.)

    I would say that if anyone deserved the title of 'whistleblower', this man damned sure qualifies.

    Now, the next step - what in the hell do we actually do about it aside from individual protection? Sure, recent congressional actions (Thank you, Sen. Paul!) have put an end to at least one program... problem is, another grew to take its place (basically, the FBI is picking up where the NSA is allegedly leaving off).

    I suspect this is going to take a lot more work than deleting web cookies and an occasional filibuster...

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:I can agree to that... by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now, the next step - what in the hell do we actually do about it aside from individual protection? Sure, recent congressional actions (Thank you, Sen. Paul!) have put an end to at least one program... problem is, another grew to take its place (basically, the FBI is picking up where the NSA is allegedly leaving off).

      I don't think we will ever trust them on this subject again. Individual protection is the only way, and that is exactly why we have so many government officials saying encryption needs to go.

    2. Re:I can agree to that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Maybe the next step (for Americans, at least) should be standing up and demanding that our Government Grant Snowden Clemency.

      Or, at a bare minimum, a guarantee of a fair and PUBLIC trial.

      But, most of can't even be arsed into doing that. Given how we treat those who stand up for us, I am surprised anyone bothers.

    3. Re:I can agree to that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "would have rivaled the old East German Stasi"

      Are you kidding me? When was the last time you feared for your life because you said the president is doing a crappy job? How many of your relatives or friends have disappeared into the night?

    4. Re:I can agree to that... by Totenglocke · · Score: 4, Informative

      He didn't violate his oath, he violated an NDA. I'm pretty sure that courts have consistently ruled in favor of immunity for breaking an NDA when exposing criminal behavior.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    5. Re:I can agree to that... by jc42 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Now, the next step - what in the hell do we actually do about it aside from individual protection? Sure, recent congressional actions (Thank you, Sen. Paul!) have put an end to at least one program... problem is, another grew to take its place (basically, the FBI is picking up where the NSA is allegedly leaving off).

      I don't think we will ever trust them on this subject again. Individual protection is the only way, and that is exactly why we have so many government officials saying encryption needs to go.

      There's really just one major reason they haven't succeeded yet: The world's financial system, including your bank and/or credit union, now uses the internet for most of their communications. If encryption is outlawed, all your account information will be going over the wires unencrypted, for anyone along the route to intercept and store for later usage.

      This is probably the main reason that encryption is still legal nearly everywhere (and used without prosecution in many places where it isn't legal). True, it doesn't matter to our rulers whether our account info is flying around unencrypted. But they understand quite well that encryption is what keeps their own large bank accounts safe from raiding by all the world's con men and identity thieves, not to mention their political opponents. Outlawing encryption for The Masses' account info while keeping it legal for anyone with economic or political power is pretty much an unsolved (and probably unsolvable) problem, so in most countries encryption remains legal.

      Of course, they can put pressure on the suppliers of the software, and persuade them to supply encryption that's decodable by their own spy organizations. But this is subject to all the usual gotchas, since decryption keys and code are easily accessible via the usual bribes to the right low-paid admin flunkies in the appropriate organizations. This is something that all our politicians inherently understand, and to protect their own information, they easily decide that their own communications (and their funders') have to remain encrypted.

      We can be fairly sure that our banks and other financial institutions will continue to educate our government leaders about all this, as they have done in the past.

      (Actually, I keep reading that in much of the world, cell phones are now a major tool for handling financial transactions. I'd guess that this requires effective encryption to prevent interception by the crooks, including those inside the phone companies and government agencies. I haven't read good technical articles about how this actually works, especially dealing with local encryption laws. I wonder where the best docs on the topic might be. Perhaps someone here on /. might know .... ;-)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    6. Re:I can agree to that... by Terwin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "would have rivaled the old East German Stasi"

      Are you kidding me? When was the last time you feared for your life because you said the president is doing a crappy job? How many of your relatives or friends have disappeared into the night?

      Hear about what happened to political activists in Wisconsin when they went against the unions or supported those who did?

      http://www.nationalreview.com/...

      If something similar is going on today, it would be illegal for anyone to talk about it.
      So unless you have personally tried to take political action against the President or other entrenched powers, what makes you think you would *not* be given cause to fear for your life and those of your loved ones should you do so?

    7. Re:I can agree to that... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're taking your knowledge about the former East Bloc from 80s US series, I take it?

      The Stasi was far more subtle than this Stalinist browbeat methods. They also didn't have to, there were far more efficient and sinister means at their disposal. If you were on "the list", you were just being bullied. It was subtle, but usually direct enough that you knew that you should "correct" your behaviour. E.g. you didn't get promoted anymore and if you ask, you were informed that your "performance" doesn't warrant it. Things you received from Western relatives got "lost" in transport miraculously. They went so far to inconvenience your friends so they would turn away from you to "get back on the good side", provided that simple slander didn't already do the job. It went as far as turning your friends and more so even your coworkers against you. How do you think it is, if your friends don't know you anymore and your coworkers know that making every moment you spend at work a living hell will earn them brownie points with the higher ups?

      And so on, so forth. A totalitarian state has many powerful ways to make your life absolutely miserable without even talking to you directly, let alone "making you disappear".

      The huge advantage of this whole scheme is that you can't even complain about it. The state? Noooo, the state has nothing against you. You're just a lazy worker, that's all. And quite unlucky too. And somehow you really don't know how to deal with people if everyone at work hates you.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:I can agree to that... by blue9steel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Agreed, he's guilty as sin, but he did the right thing morally and for the country at great personal cost, we should pardon him.

  4. Re:People are claiming a victory where there is no by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This. Ended the program? Bullshit.. We outsourced the program, the same way the government routinely does with anything it wants but can't legally do itself.

    That said, I'll still take this over what we had last week. But don't think we won the war yet - Not by a looong shot.

  5. This is my problem with Snowden by barlevg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He really seems to live in his own bubble of self-delusion. The majority of Americans: (1) do not know about NSA surveillance, (2) do not care and (3) have no fucking idea who Edward Snowden is. Just this week, the USA Freedom Act reauthorized these programs, and the only politician who seems to care? Rand Paul, the most hated man in the Senate. I'm sorry, but the consequences of Snowden's leaks have been minimal, and, if the world is saying anything about surveillance, it's not no, it's "Yeah, okay. Whatever."

    1. Re:This is my problem with Snowden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      1. World != US
      2. Before his relevations all infosec guys who knew and were talking about this stuff were considered conspiracypathic lunatics. Now the people who deny existance of this stuff are considered idiots or liars.

    2. Re:This is my problem with Snowden by Nite_Hawk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This isn't about self-delusion, this is about politics. It's good for snowden (and us) to claim progress and warm people up to the idea that even Washington thinks totally unchecked surveillance maybe goes a little too far. I suspect it's also ultimately good for the political class too if they play their cards right. Snowden is a chaotic figure that divides party votes in strange and unexpected ways. I imagine mainstream politicians hate that. He needs to be either a traitor or a patriot, not something in-between that divides their votes. The freedom act is a nice bump for Snowden into the patriot camp. It gives politicians cover for supporting him (or at least claiming he was well meaning if misguided). Once that starts, I think it will snowball and Snowden eventually will come back home (while his message will be coopted and perverted to benefit re-election campaigns).

  6. Re:You do not seem to care by hjf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OH SHUT UP, YOU FUCKING IDIOT.

    The UK is part of Europe and internet is CENSORED over there. Everything you do online is logged.

    In France ENCRYPTION IS ILLEGAL, to the point that there is a special version of Windows there that disables encryption.

    Why do Europeans have a tendency of making fools of themselves trying to look superior to the USA? (And no, i'm neither north american nor european)

  7. American Hero by NichardRixon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Edward Snowden knowingly gave the world this information at enormous personal cost. Only if enough of us stand up, stop debating minutiae, and demand that it stop will Mr. Snowden's sacrifice have been worth it.

  8. Re:People are claiming a victory where there is no by fustakrakich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The spying is still happening.

    That's right... Nothing has changed. And Mr. Snowden hasn't been watching the elections recently. Right wing nationalism is all the rage and making a big comeback. Mass media says a lot about surveillance, but at election time the people still don't give a shit.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  9. Re:You do not seem to care by Major+Blud · · Score: 3, Informative

    "In France ENCRYPTION IS ILLEGAL"

    I don't think that this is the case:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
    "As of 2011 and since 2004, the law for trust in the digital economy (LCEN) mostly liberalized the use of cryptography.
    As long as cryptography is only used for authentication and integrity purposes, it can be freely used. The cryptographic key or the nationality of the entities involved in the transaction do not matter. Typical e-business websites fall under this liberalized regime.
    Exportation and importation of cryptographic tools to or from foreign countries must be either declared (when the other country is a member of the European Union) or requires an explicit authorization (for countries outside the EU)."

    "The UK is part of Europe and internet is CENSORED"
    This one is complex, but it looks like any type of net filtering is done voluntarily by ISPs
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...

    As for the parent:
    "If something like that had happened in Europe, we would not have tolerated it even for a microsecond. We would have rallied on the streets and attacked the agency's headquarters."

    I assume he's talking about recently? I mean, Europe was home to the Stasi, Fascism, Nazism, etc etc. Besides, what are they going to attack the agency's headquarters with? Cricket bats?

    --
    If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
  10. Re:People are claiming a victory where there is no by Copid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Onion had it right: Frustrated NSA Now Forced To Rely On Mass Surveillance Programs That Haven’t Come To Light Yet.

    Without real oversight, we can write, repeal, or expire whatever laws we want. It won't make a difference.

    --
    An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
  11. Re:People are claiming a victory where there is no by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What 'left leaning' party?

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  12. Re:You do not seem to care by towermac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "As long as cryptography is only used for authentication and integrity purposes"

    Which means you can't encrypt the content of a message.