Hackers Leak List of FBI Employees (vice.com)

puddingebola writes: The hackers responsible for the leaking of DHS employees made good on their threat to reveal the names of 20,000 FBI employees. From the article: "The hacker provided Motherboard with a copy of the data on Sunday. The list includes names, email addresses (many of which are non-public) and job descriptions, such as task force deputy director, security specialist, special agent, and many more. The list also includes roughly 1,000 FBI employees in an intelligence analysis role."

Comments

Statement From FBI

[Anonymous Coward]

Criminal masterminds released stolen and useless HR data.

We're too incompetent to catch them.

They're too stupid to realize that this shit is worthless. I guess their too young to remember a thing called a phone book. It had everyone's contact info in it and everybody had a copy.

Re:Statement From FBI

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't recall phone books saying "John Smith (FBI AGENT) ...... (555)-555-1234"

Asinine

[Anonymous Coward]

This is asinine. There are good reasons why some of the employees of the DHS and DOJ aren't made public. For people working in an intelligence analyst role, an undercover agent, or something along those lines, leaking that information could make those people or their families vulnerable to kidnapping and violence. I understand leaking information about secret or top secret operations, especially when it's unethical and/or infringes on the rights of the people. This serves no such purpose. It's a juvenile action. Just because you have unauthorized access to do something and you have the skills to do so, that doesn't make it right.

Re:Asinine

[DigiShaman]

Some people just want to watch the world burn.

Re:Asinine

[DigiShaman]

Between these hackers and Hillary Clinton keeping top secret info on her server, frankly, I don't think anyone cares anymore. We have an incompetent government elected by incompetent people. What the fuck can an smart and intelligent person such as myself do? I'm surrounded by a hoard of blooming idiots!

Re:Asinine

[DarkOx]

If operational security was taken seriously or important these organizations would be much much smaller. The more people who know a secret the harder it is to control. If the three letters want to be effective they need to go back to their original mandates and downsize to the minimal number of people required to execute on them.

The FBI tries to be the everything of law enforcement, they should not. In fact they should probably not even have arrest powers. I would argue make them investigators of federal but domestic crimes only. Let them investigate, turn the arrest warrants over to the marshal service to pick folks up.

Re:Asinine

[gstoddart]

This is asinine. There are good reasons why some of the employees of the DHS and DOJ aren't made public. For people working in an intelligence analyst role, an undercover agent, or something along those lines, leaking that information could make those people or their families vulnerable to kidnapping and violence.

But you know what, it really boils down to "if these agencies are going to spy on us, often in violation of the law and our rights ... and then use parallel construction to commit perjury, why should we care?"

I don't disagree with your sentiment, but the reality is the reasons these people don't want their information made public are their own problem. Especially when they show so little regard for us.

Just because you have unauthorized access to do something and you have the skills to do so, that doesn't make it right.

So, when these agencies use Sting Rays, or commit perjury via parallel construction so they can lie about how they got information and deny you legal process, or otherwise ignore the law ... is that right? Because a lot of people disagree that "because we said so" is a valid reason.

Yes, it's reckless and dangerous .. but it seems the kind of thing which is intended to say "not only can we not trust you bastards, you can't even secure your own shit." I can see the point: when law enforcement stops caring about our rights, it's well beyond the point where we should care about them.

There's an awful lot of anger over the fact that law enforcement has taken the attitude of we'll do whatever we can get away with. So, are they entitled to expect anything different?

But let's not pretend that there aren't on-going abuses by these agencies which happen all the time, and which undermine the very rights and freedoms they pretend to be protecting.

Re:Asinine

[LifesABeach]

Ho-hum, this is nothing more than a list to sell to spammers. Of course it will be very telling how the FBI handles these folks. Because if they can do it, so can I.

Re:Asinine

[MitchDev]

We have a criminal government that loves to wipe its ass with the Constitution when it's convenient for them to do so. The only time they care about the Constitution is when they want to use it to shield them when they get caught.

No one trusts the government because the government no longer cares about the citizens and their rights, and if the government wants to know why so many see them as the enemy, look in the mirror, it's how they treat the American people. Suck when you have to swallow your own medicine, doesn't it?

Re:Asinine

[Anonymous Coward]

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." - George Carlin

Re:Asinine

[cjjjer]

Two wrongs don't make a right it just hurts both sides in the end.

Re:Asinine

[cbiltcliffe]

This serves no such purpose. It's a juvenile action. Just because you have unauthorized access to do something and you have the skills to do so, that doesn't make it right.

I read it as "You want a backdoor key to every encryption scheme in the world, and you can't even keep your own employee lists safe?"

Re:Asinine

[dinfinity]

I don't disagree with your sentiment, but the reality is the reasons these people don't want their information made public are their own problem. Especially when they show so little regard for us.

It might seem a bit harsh to blame the low-level guys and girls for the high-level decisions (which is who most of 'these people' are). OTOH, the lower-level people are pretty much all accomplices in crimes against the constitution (and humanity in general).

I'm definitely not saying it should be open season on each and everybody in those organisations, but it is hard to feel sorry for any 'collateral damage' done here.

There's even a case to be made to purposefully 'hurt' the larger part of an organisation. Considering Snowden exposing how terrible the high-level decisions have been did fuck-all to change them, trying to start some bottom-up change might prove more effective.

Re:Asinine

[Chas]

It's not that the government no longer cares about its citizens. It is that they've lost respect for their citizens and, having operated with impunity for so long, have lost their fear of what said citizenry can do when properly motivated.

All they need to do nowadays is keep the majority of us fat and happy and they figure they can do whatever the fuck they please.

And, for the most part, they're right.

Re:Asinine

[MitchDev]

That saying means less and less and time goes on.

Our own government says that torture is OK if it gets us what we want, so two wrongs do make a right apparently.

Welcome to what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Re:Asinine

[nospam007]

"But since we know that all our communications are monitored, it should actually be pretty easy, right?"

It is. It was somebody with a stolen laptop with TOR on a public WIFI spot.

So the solution is to forbid laptop thefts, TOR and public WIFI spots.

Re:Asinine

[liquid_schwartz]

It takes a lot of people to watch everyone all the time.

Re:Asinine

[surd1618]

Kornbluth had an idea: Send them on a cruise!

Re:Asinine

[tnk1]

The hackers are stupid too.

Why?

The FBI is charmingly quaint in how it deals with computer crime because it is made up of government employees using government procedures.

Now, however, you're making them care on a personal level about taking out hackers, which has a tendency to increase the effectiveness of people in previously mundane positions.

Kids, the first rule of treasure hunting is: "Don't wake the dragon".

Re:Asinine

[MitchDev]

Sadly, you are correct

Re:Asinine

[Sarten-X]

Especially when they show so little regard for us.

it's well beyond the point where we should care about them.

That's entirely beside the point.

If the FBI, NSA, DHS, or any other government agency broke the law, that's a problem. It shouldn't be forgiven or forgotten. It should be the subject of debate, lawsuits, impeachment, and ultimately an election ending the career of those responsible. Those are all things that the law allows.

There's an awful lot of anger over the fact that law enforcement has taken the attitude of we'll do whatever we can get away with. So, are they entitled to expect anything different?

The law does not allow you (or any other hacktivist) to go break into the FBI just because you're angry. That's not a good reason, and it's what makes those hackers criminals. They crossed a legal line, and it really doesn't matter that you can understand why they did it. They still broke the law, and now they're putting people in harm's way unnecessarily.

Let's reframe the argument... People in prison are murderers, rapists, thieves, and drug dealers. They're well past the point where we should care about them, so it's fine when facilities aren't maintained and inmates are abused, right? Since they showed so little regard for their victims' well-being, are they entitled to expect anything different? The reasons these people want to be treated humanely are their own problem.

You're advocating a brutal world of vigilantism and rule of force, rather than rule of law. I don't think anybody has claimed that the government agencies are perfectly innocent, but today they are the victims, and should be regarded as such in this context.

Re:Asinine

[zlives]

just wait till pres Trump gets a hold of you, i think he mentioned going ISIS on your ass ;)

Re:Asinine

[gstoddart]

"it's well beyond the point where we should care about them."

That's entirely beside the point.

No, that's exactly the point.

The law does not allow you (or any other hacktivist) to go break into the FBI just because you're angry.

The law doesn't allow thw FBI to do blanket surveillance without a warrant or commit perjury either, and yet ...

Let's reframe the argument... People in prison are murderers, rapists, thieves, and drug dealers. They're well past the point where we should care about them, so it's fine when facilities aren't maintained and inmates are abused, right?

Random bullshit strawman, no thanks.

You're advocating a brutal world of vigilantism and rule of force, rather than rule of law.

If the FBI et al don't follow the law, don't pretend like they should be shielded by it. Rule of law being something we have to adhere to but they can ignore? Hell no.

I don't think anybody has claimed that the government agencies are perfectly innocent, but today they are the victim

Again, an expectation of sympathy, why again? Collectively, the FBI doesn't give a shit about the law or your privacy, but we're supposed to respect theirs?

Look, I'm in no way associated with this stuff. I think the guys who do it are poking the bear, and will likely find that can sting a little. I'm not suggesting anybody run out and do this shit.

But I am saying the collective anger at the entire agency is not happening in a vacuum. If they're going to ignore the law and trample on our rights, going all boo hoo about theirs is hypocrisy.

I think the people doing this should reasonably expect a lot of law enforcement resources to be expended. But I simply can't muster up sympathy for the collective tragedy of FBI agents, who collectively don't give a fuck about the laws or our rights.

This "it's OK, we're law enforcement, we're the good guys" is just not something I can believe any more.

So, no, I don't care. I'm beyond caring. Because they stopped holding up their end years ago.

Re:Asinine

[Khashishi]

I don't know. It serves about as much purpose as occupying a government building.

Re:Asinine

[ewibble]

But, but, but, if they have done nothing wrong, they have nothing to hide.

Oh wait that is a nonsense statement.

Re:Asinine

[blindseer]

The federal marshals work for the judicial branch. Their mandate is to search for escaped prisoners and such, people that have already been convicted of a crime. The FBI is tasked with the enforcement of federal laws, which has some overlap with escaped prisoners and such but the federal marshals don't have much overlap with what the FBI does.

The FBI not having arrest powers is an interesting idea. Let the FBI investigate but once it comes time to arrest then let the local sheriff perform the arrest. This works on areas within a state boundary but falls apart in federal districts, territories, and so forth. These areas could have a local equivalent of a sheriff for the purpose of enacting arrests but then they'd be employees of the FBI in every way but name.

If you want to talk about pruning federal law enforcement powers then I propose doing away with the DEA and BATFE. These are enforcement agencies that have powers that overlap completely with the FBI, so roll them into the FBI and do away with the separate agencies. An FBI that is busy with tracking down child molesters, kidnappers, murderers, arsonists, and what not might not then bother with handing guns to drug dealers like the DEA and BATFE has done.

Re:Asinine

[erapert]

I'm going to go ahead and mention the guards at the concentration camps.

The low-level people are the edifice of tyranny. The super genius evil mastermind has nothing without henchmen. Politicians and tyrants have nothing without jack-booted thugs. And our little self-righteous think-of-the-children tyrant wannabes in the west are nothing without the army of "low-level people" keeping the surveillance state running.

The low-level people just shrugged and violated the law and everyone else's privacy this whole time. Now all-a-sudden they feel exposed and endangered when the same is done to them?!

The Golden Rule applies just as much to low-level people and tyrants as it does to children in a school yard and adults on the street.

Re:Asinine

[sexconker]

For the arithmetic mean (the most common operation used to find averages), that's only true if you assume an even distribution.
You're looking for the median person.

Re:Asinine

[exomondo]

Surely it serves to demonstrate that they can't be trusted with the private data of other people when they can't even secure their own.

Re:Asinine

[mike.mondy]

This is asinine. ... undercover agent, or something along those lines, leaking that information could make those people or their families vulnerable to kidnapping and violence.

How the hell is that +5 Insightful?!? I seriously doubt undercover FBI agents are using their real names! The only time their real name should come out is sometimes at trial.

Just because you have unauthorized access to do something and you have the skills to do so, that doesn't make it right.

Agreed...

Re:Asinine

[LifesABeach]

Sounds like you know what you're talking about. Why don't you site a reference? But don't worry if you can't; we all understand why. But look at the bright of it. You're an idiot, but you're a danger only to yourself. Kiss kiss.

X-Files . . . ?

[PolygamousRanchKid]

It would be interesting to see if they still have some folks working on the X-Files.

Now if these hackers want to win the Triple Crown, they need to do the NSA next.

Re:Yawn

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, we release the truth about the chemtrails and aliens every day. It's just the the chemtrails and alien mind rays make you forget that you just read all about it.

Re:Yawn

[Thanshin]

What I'd like to know is the truth about chemtrails and aliens.

And also chemtrails.

Not the brightest in the bunch?

[unencode200x]

Stealing and publishing the information of 1,000 FBI agents including ones that work in intelligence seems like a good way to get 1,000 FBI agents motivated to bust you.

Re:Not the brightest in the bunch?

[The-Ixian]

yes... but encryption... they can't catch people anymore now that they can't crack their iPhones...

Re:Not the brightest in the bunch?

[unencode200x]

Good point. Yet another "reason" to go after evil "encryption." It's getting ridiculous. I even hear non-techie people talking about it.

Backdoors

[linuxwrangler]

And yet there are people who still think these folks could keep an encryption backdoor secure. They can't even keep the front door closed.

Re:Backdoors

[cbiltcliffe]

Exactly my thought. Especially considering the value difference between an employee list, and a backdoor key to every encryption method on the planet (I know, I know....except OTPs), there's no way in hell every hacking group on the planet won't be trying to break into the FBI/NSA/etc to get their hands on this key.
If they actually manage to force through some stupid encryption backdoor law, I give it a month, tops, before someone evil.....make that "someone else who's also evil".....has the backdoor key.

Re:Backdoors

[AHuxley]

Details that are just set out in english in full, left out in plain text on a networked system?
Honey trap?
Any files found that are not on secure, encrypted systems and airgapped could just be bait in parts or full.
A number of front companies, contractors, terms, projects are just waiting with CCTV, tracking, cameras, 24/7 surveillance teams or online website profile traps.
Any of the very unique search terms are flagged and tracked.
Any smart nation would just have flooded the US with generations of clean applications. Cleared, trusted and tested staff that have now risen up the ranks over many decades.
The trapdoors and backdoors are designed into all US telco, export and consumer product lines. The device as sold is the "key" to most other nations and domestic users.

The best part about this...

[thedarb]

Is we can use it to start making a hiring blacklist for the private sector. Refuse to ever employ anyone who's ever worked for the FBI. Hopefully this list can grow to include NSA, as well.

Re:The best part about this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

a) Intentions aside, FBI/NSA have some of the smartest people working for them. Why exclude them from the private sector?
b) Blacklisting them will ensure that they continue to work for the FBI/NSA or other government agencies, defeating the whole intention of your point
c) None of these people set the policies, or make the laws. Why are you hating on them so much?

Re:The best part about this...

[MBasial]

I think the idea is that some of us suspect that people who "leave" the NSA to work at Google, etc., have not exactly cut all ties to their "previous" employer. You don't need a backdoor if one of your people walked in the front door with a suitably-edited resume and got hired. Those of us who object to illegal techniques like parallel construction see people who are willing to violate the rights of their fellow citizens as undesirable hires. Knowing who used to work for agencies where unethical practices are commonplace is a useful filter. I know I wouldn't hire James Clapper, at least ... (rubs face with hand) ... not wittingly.

Re: The best part about this...

[Anonymous Coward]

One counter example I am aware of; 17 year old kid was recruited right out of high school because of his math skills. He was locked into govt before the private sector could provide counter offers.

Re:The best part about this...

[phorm]

I think the reasoning behind such a decision is this:

Given the number of companies that are showing compromises that look suspiciously deliberate, can you really *trust* somebody who is known to be/have-been working for an intelligence agency not to be a plant?

Re: The best part about this...

[blindseer]

A possible counter argument is that this person that is black listed from the private sector because of a past with the FBI could then find work with NOAA predicting hurricanes, DARPA working on lots of stuff, NASA doing astronomy and physics, or a number of public universities doing just about anything.

Blacklisting someone because of a past with the FBI might be a dick move but perhaps we could let them redeem themselves by doing something beneficial for society for a few years before we drop them from the list.

Re:The best part about this...

[thedarb]

Yes, thank you. You cannot trust such people with anything in your company. They willingly and knowingly worked for agencies that break the law and violate citizens rights. They chose to be complicit by working there. That means their ethics are proven to be poor, at best. Them applying for your company could be part of an investigation, at the worst.

Besides, if ever they were to lose their agency job, why would you reward their treason with a pay check? Let them starve.

Re:public servants

[alvinrod]

Only so far as it relates to their position. Just because you work for the government doesn't mean your personal contact information or medical records should be released to the public.

However, documentation produced as a part of their job should certainly be available to the public and I would argue that we shouldn't need pesky FOIA requests in order to access it. Obviously rough drafts that have not been officially released or cases under active investigation have a reason to be excluded, but beyond those cases, there's no good reason to keep it secret other than the government wanting to keep hidden that which they'd prefer the public not see.

Remember the leaked NSA employee manual?

[Anonymous Coward]

In response to the NSA's Clipper chip with "escrowed" master keys, the FOUO NSA Employee' Manual was publically leaked. With a public outcry, the Clipper proposal was subsequently withdrawn.

http://theory.stanford.edu/~donald/NSA.doc.html

Not much is changed in more than 20 years except our masters persevering at taking more bites of the poisoned Apple.

http://theory.stanford.edu/~donald/NSA.doc.html

If only

[The-Ixian]

they could crack his encryption.... I guess they'll never catch him now...

It's like carpet bombing ourselves

[rjejr]

I'm not a big fan of government, or cops, or government cops, and I'd wear a tinfoil hat if I could afford the tinfoil, but releasing a blanket list of 20,000 employees seems more evil than good. I'd like to think that at least 20-30% of the people who work for the FBI aren't evil - maybe 10-15% for the NSA - and those people shouldn't all have their names and emails released on a stolen list. Go after the corrupt ones, post pictures of their illegal affairs and taking money under the table, wiretap their homes and release tapes of them talking about the 47%, but I'm not ready to lump them all together as evil and make a list for some psycho to use as target practice.

Encryption backdoors

[Anonymous Coward]

Hai guise! You can, like, totally trust us to keep safe the keys for your encryption backdoors on your phones. Just ignore the fact that we can't even keep simple HR data secure. *waves hands* We totally know what we're doing when we propose encryption backdoors. It's safe!!1!

Makes sense

[HalAtWork]

We should have complete transparency at the federal level, this makes it easier.

Don't blame every individual

[MobyDisk]

these people ... show so little regard for us.... when these agencies use Sting Rays, or commit perjury...not only can we not trust you bastards... So, are they entitled

Most of the people on that list aren't doing any of the the hings you complained about. You just lumped every individual law enforcement officer, undercover agent, secretary, and janitor who work for the FBI under one umbrella. This hack hurts the individuals more than the agency as a whole. It won't stop any of the things you listed. I hope my employer doesn't do something you don't like, because then me and 30,000 other innocent people who work for this company suddenly get on your shit list, and you think it is okay to release our personal data.

Re:Don't blame every individual

[gstoddart]

these people ... show so little regard for us.... when these agencies use Sting Rays, or commit perjury...not only can we not trust you bastards... So, are they entitled

Wow, that's a nice hack job of a quote you did.

Most of the people on that list aren't doing any of the the hings you complained about. You just lumped every individual law enforcement officer, undercover agent, secretary, and janitor who work for the FBI under one umbrella.

I'm not advocating it, I'm not condoning it, but I sure as fuck understand it.

The problem is, the agency as a whole has raised the ire of a lot of people. It's not like you can only target the people who do this stuff, and it's not like they give a shit.

The problem is, when they use things like Sting Rays or other blanket surveillance crap, suddenly other innocent people can end up on their radar without any legal basis other than "while we were listening to everybody else we saw this and then suddenly investigated you for fun". They do this shit to us already.

So, are we supposed to extend a courtesy to law enforcement they won't extend to us? Because that's some pretty wishful thinking.

because then me and 30,000 other innocent people who work for this company suddenly get on your shit list, and you think it is okay to release our personal data.

You're not on MY shitlist, I'm not the one doing this stuff.

But I'm afraid I can understand why someone who is angry at the FBI isn't willing to extend a courtesy to the rest of the members of the FBI that, as an agency, they don't extend to us -- because they don't concern themselves with our rights while they do this. These people work for an agency which is doing some things which are fairly widely known to violate your rights, bypass the Constitution, and ignore the letter and spirit of the law.

Which means the people lashing out at that agency aren't discriminating between the janitors, and the guys running the programs -- any more than the FBI are worrying about the rest of us.

Illegal blanket surveillance doesn't prune out the innocent people either. Parallel construction to lie in court about how they came to be looking at you violates your right to due process and the right to see your accuser, instead of someone who has fabricated a story after the fact to make it look like they didn't break the law -- you know perjury.

I have a hard time seeing this as some egregious offense against their rights while they do the same to us.

Re:Don't blame every individual

[Escogido]

>This hack hurts the individuals more than the agency as a whole. It won't stop any of the things you listed.

If someone considers the three-letter agencies criminal, it's easy to see how demonstrating to the "innocent people" who in that person's view are accomplices that they are not safe, is going to act as a deterrent for current and future employees. This stuff scales, because it affects the organization's job market as whole, and thus may eventually have an effect on what the organization actually does. Not by itself, and not by a single act, but it certainly contributes. Doesn't make it any less unlawful, but still effective, to a certain degree.

>I hope my employer doesn't do something you don't like, because then me and 30,000 other innocent people who work for this company suddenly get on your shit list, and you think it is okay to release our personal data.

Oh yes, if you work in a non-government-related software engineering, then releasing your name, address, email and phone number is going to do so much damage to you, these FBI employees would be happy to realize they are not in your shoes! </sarcasm>

Re:Don't blame every individual

[kbonin]

If you have honor, and your employer does something deplorable, and its evident that such action is now considered normal, the only honorable reaction is to QUIT THAT JOB. I've done so, others have done so. Anyone still working for the FBI, NSA, or most divisions of the DOJ is demonstrating that they have decided that it is acceptable for the government to routinely commit crimes that were once considered more egregious than the majority of the acts of the criminals they now claim to be pursuing. Anyone still working at those agencies has decided that being part of the machine is more important to them than their honor.

Re:Don't blame every individual

[MobyDisk]

Wow, that's a nice hack job of a quote you did.

Yeah, I was more highlighting the cases where you were lumping everyone in the FBI together, rather than making an actual quote. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

I'm not advocating it, I'm not condoning it, but I sure as fuck understand it.

Fine, it sure sounded like you were condoning it through your justifications. If that is the case, I withdraw my criticism. So given that statement, it makes me re-evaluate your intentions in the original post:

But you know what, it really boils down to "if these agencies are going to spy on us, often in violation of the law and our rights ... and then use parallel construction to commit perjury, why should we care?"

I now see that you put that in quotes, as though the "us" was the voice of the hackers. I didn't understand that before. Fine. But hold on just a moment:

It's not like you can only target the people who do this stuff, and it's not like they give a shit.

So here you point out that the hackers couldn't target only the "bad ones" at the FBI. So you were saying that maybe the hack was the wrong thing to do, but if they are gonna hack, they might as well target the innocent people too. Am I misreading this? Because it sure sounds like justification for hurting innocent people.

Then later you say:

Especially when they show so little regard for us.

Here you are using your own voice. That "us" wasn't the hackers. This is your personal justification.

So, are they entitled to expect anything different?

Here you posit that the FBI is deserving of this. That's justification too.

Even in reply to my post, you reiterated your dislike of parallel reconstruction. But the hackers posted this list with the hashtag #freepalestine, not #parallelreconstruction. So you aren't understanding the hackers at all. You are applying your own motivations to their actions. Search your feelings my friend, deep down it sounds like you are glad this happened. You even bothered to reply to an AC who was just trying to say "Dammit hackers, this isn't fair! You hurt innocent people!" Almost any "understanding" at that point is justification for the hack.

(Meta: I bothered to reply here because you replied to something I was saying in another thread - a good well-worded clarification about Sprint and network neutrality. So I take you to be a reasonable person worth engaging in discussion of. You worded your reply without the usual Slashdot "Well screw you you know nothing about hacking..." which I really appreciate in the current climate around here.)

Re:Don't blame every individual

[drinkypoo]

You just lumped every individual law enforcement officer, undercover agent, secretary, and janitor who work for the FBI under one umbrella.

What? They all chose to be under one umbrella, called The FBI. Nobody had to lump them there, that's who gives them all a paycheck.

Re:Don't blame every individual

[gstoddart]

So I take you to be a reasonable person worth engaging in discussion of

LOL, now that's a first.

So, basically, rather than responding to you point by point, let me point you to this story on the front-page.

And everything I said earlier, and say not boils down to "fuck you, FBI, you ignorant bastards who feel we should cede our freedoms to hypothetical scenarios without proof or probable cause, and in direct violation of the law".

When the head of the FBI is a fucking moron who things secrets from law enforcement should be illegal, I can't give a rats ass about them being hacked.

due to more sophisticated technology and wider use of encryption is "overwhelmingly affecting" law enforcement operations, including investigations into murder, car accidents, drug trafficking and the proliferation of child pornography

Sorry, I'm no longer willing to let FUD and other bullshit be the back doors to the law. Because I simply don't trust them, and don't care.

You're right, I am not defending the hackers on a specific reason, or even for their reasons. But I've moved past the point where I can simply say "as law abiding sheep we should bend over any time law enforcement asks, and stop pretending like their convenience trumps our rights".

Specifically why the hackers did it, I don't care. I just can't muster the sympathy when to happens to the FBI etc these days. Because I'm tired of them claiming they need the keys to the kingdom just in case -- that's fundamentally not compatible with the free society they've been tasked to defend.

Re:Don't blame every individual

[MobyDisk]

Agreed, especially the part about "evident that such action is now considered normal." Isolated incidents aren't enough. It's the pattern of behavior throughout the company, especially one's own superiors, that matter.

I would add some more limitations:
1. Don't quit because of the actions of another division you have no contact with.
2. Instead of quitting, do the right thing until they fire you. Ex: As an NSA employee, instead of using exploits to install trojans, write-up an explanation of the exploit and ask your boss to submit it to CERT. Notify your boss's boss of what is happening. Report your orders to the ethics committee. As an police officer, instead of testifying that you stopped the person for a tail light out, testify that the FBI called you and told you to pull the car over and wouldn't say why. That forces things into the open. Only then would the courts get a chance to address it.

Years ago, the NSA used to help secure U.S. computer systems. They developed encryption, and fixed known security holes. They made SELinux. If the NSA offered to hire me to go to companes and help secure their software, I would take that job, regardless of what other divisions of the NSA do. That would be a chance to not only do the right thing, but to influence from within. Sometimes it is a stronger statement to stay and do the right thing, than to leave.

A personal example from my experience: I work for a company with about 50,000 employees. Even as I type this it sounds crazy huge to me. The company is actually a really good, moral company, in my opinion. My division, which probably has a few thousand employees, makes devices that detect cancer, bloodborne diseases, etc. The idea is to help hospitals detect things faster, and prescribe the proper antibiotics faster. It's a good company.

So last year I heard that a court ruled my employer was using anti-competitive practices to muscle into the market for syringes or something like that. It was a civil suit brought by a competitor. It was a product that is not made by my division so I don't even know who or where. So should I leave in protest? Should the janitors leave? Or the CEO's receptionist? Or the guy who comes out and fixes the piece of equipment that might save someone's life? Maybe it should just be the people in that other division. I honestly don't know. When the company sent out the email, I really wanted to know what exactly the company had done and who did it. I was angry. I wondered if they would address it at the company quarterly meetings. But I don't even know if it happened 10 years ago or 10 weeks ago. I don't know what country it even happened in. With a company with divisions in 10+ countries, and 50,000 employees, it might as well have been some other company that did it. I submit that quitting would have been silly.

So you're saying I should apply..

[modi123]

So you're saying I should apply since the list won't have my information and I have a completely clean dossier (which is French for dossier) to run the track up the ladder of authority and power? Yisss! Burn notices for everyone else but this guy!

Why is that?

[Trachman]

Currently according to the governmental instructions and memos doctors are monitoring you, enter all your medical information to the computers, and all the medical record data is available to the governmental employees

Contact information? Government knows all your personal information.

Let's turn the tables now. Are you ready to move out of the comfort zone?

In my opinion, each and every tax dollar should be transparent, and all the governmental employees should also be completely transparent, with few exceptions related to deep intelligence operations.

If government does not want to disclose some data, perhaps they should not be doing it.

All the government money should be paid and received in Bitcoin style for 100% transparency...

...could make those people or their families vulne

[MooseTick]

"could make those people or their families vulnerable to kidnapping and violence"

Realistically, has anything like this ever happened in the existence of the FBI? Its a great movie plot, but at least in the US, political based kidnappings are unheard of.

Re:Yawn

[dsmatthews9379]

If you were a silicon based life-form and tried eating carbon based beans from Earth you'd start leaving chemtrails too.

Re:you want security?

[AHuxley]

East Germany did that to ensure it could get its staff names quickly on a computer. The CIA walked out with the computer files.
Before that the East Germans did have a good paper file system. Split all names, projects and details on paper files in different vaults. Get senior officials to sign over the paperwork if the full records had to be connected. No one person could ever walk out to the West with all details on one set of files.

The issue now seems to be plain text files existing on different computer systems that are now connected or have been upgraded by contractors as part of a cloud.
Air gapped and lots of encryption as policy?

Re:public servants

[LordWabbit2]

there's no good reason to keep it secret other than the government wanting to keep hidden that which they'd prefer the public not see.

Which is precisely why it's all secret, because they are getting up to shit that would have the public up in arms (literally). It took Edward Snowden stealing documents and making a run for it to even start making all the crap they are up to public knowledge. Even after what he revealed the American sheeple are standing around going "oh, well, it's for our safety" and nothing has changed. Edward still can't come home.

No, it is not asinine.

[HalAtWork]

These records have been compromised and the only way authorities have been made aware is by a public leak. Previously this information was surely compromised in secret and lives were at stake. Now that these lives have been made aware they may be safely extracted before they are taken advantage of. Just like a software exploit that may be passed around in the underground (or in the NSA) before Apple/MS/whoever can fix it, people are still vulnerable in the meantime.