Slashdot Mirror


The Most Striking Thing About the WikiLeaks CIA Data Dump Is How Little Most People Cared (qz.com)

Last week, WikiLeaks released a trove of web pages describing sophisticated software tools and techniques used by the C.I.A to break into smartphones, computers, and IoT devices including smart TVs. Despite the initial media coverage, it appears normal people don't really care much about it, reports Quartz. An anonymous reader shares the report: There's also one other big difference between now and 2013. Snowden's NSA revelations sent shockwaves around the world. Despite WikiLeaks' best efforts at theatrics -- distributing an encrypted folder and tweeting the password "SplinterItIntoAThousandPiecesAndScatterItIntoTheWinds" -- the Vault 7 leak has elicited little more than a shrug from the media and the public, even if the spooks are seriously worried. Maybe it's because we already assume the government can listen to everything.

154 of 308 comments (clear)

  1. Because most people already assume the worst by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most people with half-a-brain already assumed that the CIA, NSA, and FBI were doing stuff like this. This merely confirmed our suspicions.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think it's becoming normal for this type of info to become public on a regular basis. So that may be the reason for such little reaction and outrage. But for those in particular who live in the US, we have our attention focused on Washington DC and all of the things happening from the current administration whether for better or worse.

    2. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It wasn't so much that we assumed they would be doing stuff like this, it's that this is what we expect they would be, should be doing.

      To put it another way, what was shocking about the Snowden revelations wasn't that the NSA spied, it was the bulk and indiscriminate nature thereof. We have no problem when the CIA is hacking the phones or computers of some ISIS or Al Qaeda bad guy or some North Korean/etc general. What bothers us is when they start vacuuming up everyone's calls/emails/etc including ours.

      If anything, the reports were actually fairly reassuring, because what it shows is that encryption works. They couldn't break it, and had to instead compromise the end device, because if your system is pwned then nothing you do on that system (phone, computer, etc) is secret from the guy who pwned it.

    3. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here is another not-so-secret revelation that will one day come out in full: The CIA and NSA are using false rape/pedophilia/sexual harassment/etc. charges to character assassinate people who threaten or cross the U.S. Julian Assange, Dominique Strauss Kahn, and Jacob Appelbaum are three of the most famous cases of this, but there are many others. So you might want to be careful about letting strange women into your hotel room if you're revealing U.S. secrets, challenging the supremacy of the U.S. Dollar, or getting in the way of attempts to put a backdoor in Tor.

    4. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Came here to say this. The CIA seems like its actually doing its job. "Shocking" would be spying on US citizens on US soil, NSA-style; otherwise, carry on!

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are you really so naive as to think they're only using these tools against non-Americans?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course not, americans can be traitors, too.

    7. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Hey listen, moderator, I didn't make that claim up. A representative of the President went on TV and suggested Trump was spied on by his TV or microwave, largely because the claim said President made about Obama ordering his phones be tapped was, to put it bluntly, a stinking steaming pile of bullshit based on claims that a radio shock jock invented, and Breitbart, that paragon on journalism, picked up.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    8. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well if you want me to be shocked and outraged then you need to show me them using them against Americans. I didn't see anything like that in Vault 7 (so far). The most terrible thing in Vault 7 was their pathetic meme folder. And harboring of bronies.

      Now what did bother me about Vault 7 is the CIA hoarding exploits instead of informing software and device makers so they could fix them. The (alleged) purpose of the US military and intelligence apparatus is to defend the people of the United States. They're taking my tax dollars, and I'm not as pissed off about it as I could be because it's supposed to be going towards efforts to defend me from attack. Instead they're using it to attack others. No no no. Defend me first. That's what I'm paying you fuckers for.

      But that's not really a concept most of the public thinks or cares about. They cared about the NSA because they were hoovering up their dick pics. Once CIA is revealed to be hoarding dick pics then people will care.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    9. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because far too many people think of the government as a benevelont father who only wants tbe best for them.

      They could'nt be more deceived

    10. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Megol · · Score: 1

      Naive? Nope. FBI and other agencies would be very angry if the CIA did stuff they aren't authorized to do. And of course CIA do use those tools against US citizens, they are allowed to and required to do so in some circumstances.

    11. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Megol · · Score: 2

      There's no need to assassinate the character of Mr. Assange, he is doing a swell job himself with all lying, backstabbing behavior etc.

    12. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by surfdaddy · · Score: 1

      I think at this point we know we are bent over and being reamed by the three letter agencies, not to mention the ISPs.

    13. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Jack+Kolesar · · Score: 2

      This.. I'd mod you up if I didn't feel compelled to reply myself. I EXPECT and WANT our government to have these tools. For those that think, "What you don't think they will use it on us?" That is not the point. I want our government to employ the absolute best hackers in the world. We need to be able to counter the same actions from other countries. The issue of spying on Americans without warrant is separate of what tools we have available. It's like not letting the government posses guns because they could be used against Americans. Not relevant to the issue at hand.

    14. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Are you really so naive as to think they're only using these tools against non-Americans?

      The problem is that we don't have "American" TVs and computers and phone and routers, and "non-American" ones used by those of other countries. Yes yes, there are regional differences, but they're mild. Americans use the same computers, the same TVs, the same phones, the same devices as folks in other countries. That means if the CIA/NSA can hack the devices of foreigners, by necessary they can do the exact same with Americans. Whether or not they abuse this or not, the ability is unsettling, and power creep has shown us in the past that more and more people want this ability. The CIA wanted a backdoor built into the iphone for national security reasons, and police agencies chimed in, saying they wanted the ability to break into phones on drug cases and child exploitation reasons.

      Obviously if they'd be able to, a whole host of hackers would be able to as well -- there's no such thing as a 'good guys only' exploit.

    15. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Jacob Applebaum? Lol.

    16. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How can one assume that this is not totally normal? The CIA is a spy agency. That means they spy on people. That would be like saying we should be shocked that Burger King makes hamburgers.

      The NSA was a shock mainly because they were spying domestically when they clearly aren't supposed to. So long as the CIA isn't spying domestically, I personally don't care what means they use. Furthermore, the fact that CIA tactics are more analogous to a fishing line than a dragnet (like the NSA prism program was) then they aren't doing anything wrong, and indeed this particular leak is doing a disservice to the US, whereas the Snowden leak was being productive.

    17. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Being spied on by a TV or microwave is depressingly plausible given the trend to give these things microphones and network connections because 'oooh, shiny IoT!'.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    18. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 2

      I don't know why the medias only give this news a single paragraph in their "IT News" section... This says a lot about freedom of press. Usually, journalists are utterly against spying on people. But right now they just STFU.

      My guess is that most journalists don't understand the implications of this, and/or think it sounds too much like 1984 to actually be true. Nobody wants to come across as a tin foil hat wearing nut-case. It's typically not good for your career.

    19. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Now what did bother me about Vault 7 is the CIA hoarding exploits instead of informing software and device makers so they could fix them.

      I would agree with this, especially since they were ostensibly directed to release these things to the manufacturers. But I guess they get to play the "necessary for national security" card.

      As far as getting worked up about it goes, though... were any of these exploits functional as mass surveillance tools? They all seem to be stuff the CIA could use to target one individual. Whether that individual is an American or a non-American - isn't this exactly how we want it to work? Isn't the reason the Snowden revelations got us so worked up that all the information he provided was about mass surveillance and bulk data collection regarding the American population at large?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    20. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by Jack_the_Tripper · · Score: 1

      You really think they aren't?

    21. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

      Looks like it is around 90% of people who know about government spying , 50% of are angry about it and 50% of it think it is a good thing.

      http://www.pewinternet.org/201...

      http://www.pewresearch.org/fac...

      http://www.pewinternet.org/201...

      --
      âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
    22. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what a microwave would report back. "Hmmm, he heated something at high for two minutes. Ah ha, now we know he made popcorn!"

      Well, now that Spicer is basically abandoning the whole claim that Obama ordered Trump spied on, I guess I can walk away from this too, other than to say that Trump's penchant for saying absurd and obviously false things very loudly is killing his credibility, and while the Republicans, at least for now, need him around to guarantee his signature on some key bills, these are not people comfortable with being made a fool of by a President who allegedly wears the same team colors.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    23. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      the worst is here.

    24. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Of course not, AMERICANS can be traitors; too.

      FTFY

    25. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by chispito · · Score: 1

      Are you really so naive as to think they're only using these tools against non-Americans?

      Did the report detail who was being targeted? If not, then what is the shocking part?

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    26. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by JustOK · · Score: 1

      But Burger King doesn't make the hamburgers. They just cook them to perfection and serve them your way

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    27. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Distinguish "normal / weird" vs "okay / fucked up".

      CIA has a long history of being totally evil. It would be weird if they suddenly became a nice , upstanding organization. I'm actually surprised by these revelations showing it isn't as deeply evil as I thought. Not that they don't want to, but it seems their abilities are lacking.

      Look up MKUltra. Revelations of Vault7, by comparison, are very tame.

    28. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      This.. I'd mod you up if I didn't feel compelled to reply myself. I EXPECT and WANT our government to have these tools.

      You want your government to hand them out to mercenary contractors who inevitably sells them on the black market before they finally leak to wikileaks? Because that was the issue here. CIA is contracting out their attacks and handing this stuff over to contractors. It was already on the black market and used by criminals when leaked to wikileaks, and still CIA kept it "secret".

    29. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      It's still wrong. There should be a comma after traitors, not a semicolon. Where did all of you learn English grammar?

    30. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by TheOuterLinux · · Score: 1

      People just expect companies to fix the vulnerabilities while knowing that they're still going to be spied on regardless. People are social networking sheep now and it's become normal to have no privacy. And because it's a government intelligence agency and so forth, you can't hold anyone accountable, even if you could spinoff the fact that not reporting vulnerablities puts everyone at risk, regardless of the country origin. U.S. intelligence agencies aren't the only ones with this knowledge and it stands to reason Black Hats knew about them too. But, they gotta get results to justify the spending. Screw everyone else because there are about 16 or so agencies like them in the U.S. competing with each other. I think that there's talk of complete data sharing among all of them, but that's dangerous. They are like any IT firm, but more God complexed and evil. Maybe it's a stretch to say that, but "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." If they told people how to fix vulnerabilities or what system not to use (Window$ cough cough) risks putting them out of a job. And anyone better at it usually gets arrested at the first screw up, regardless of White Hat or not. Yet, the U.S. hires militia when they want to get things done under the radar all the time. Example: Black Water. When Cold War 2 starts and our infrastructure crumbles and our best "tools," aka "tech militia" are all in prison, "missing...dead..cough cough," or kicked out for being brown, maybe they'll rethink things, though I doubt it. Your average white collar will not take the time to learn to be proactive in computer defense. Just ain't gonna happen.

    31. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      The media found out the CIA was spying on journalists and they didn't seem to give a shit about that. How much less they're spying on others?

    32. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Can't you take a joke?

    33. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      Well if you want me to be shocked and outraged then you need to show me them using them against Americans.

      Are you going to need a smoking gun before you believe the journalists who are reporting that they each have several intelligence sources confirming that the CIA is using it against domestic targets?

      The trouble with not believing that bombs are falling until you see a smoking crater is that sometimes you're at the bottom of one.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    34. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Where your guess is off is in assuming the existence of journalists.

      The business model of "news," is to attract eyeballs.

      Those eyeballs belong to you and me.

      We're way more interested in a pregnant woman's parody of a pregnant giraffe.

      All eyes continue to be on April the giraffe. Everyone is waiting for her to give birth. Video of the giraffe, who is at the Animal Adventure Park in New York, went viral last week as millions of people stayed glued to her story.

      Actual journalism doesn't sell.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    35. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re They all seem to be stuff the CIA could use to target one individual..
      Have a look at the Automated Implant Branch (AIB).

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    36. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      re "And of course CIA do use those tools against US citizens, they are allowed to and required to do so in some circumstances."
      That is what Church Committee worked on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Recall Operation CHAOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ?
      Project MERRIMAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Project RESISTANCE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      "Files on Illegal Spying Show C.I.A. Skeletons From Cold War" (JUNE 27, 2007)
      http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06...
      "... provide new details about how the Central Intelligence Agency illegally spied on Americans"

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    37. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure all acts of espionage are classed as treason. So, anyone providing classified information to ,well anyone , outside of those who have a need to know is considered guilty of treason.

      https://www.google.com/search?...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
    38. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Are you going to need a smoking gun

      A body would be enough. There's nothing to even suggest they've used these tools against domestic targets. You might as well point to a tank and tell me to be shocked and outraged because the US Army is crushing little American babies under its treads.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    39. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Or they could not spend the half a million dollars. But you don't get to take my money to "defend" me...and then not defend me.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    40. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      keep our Nation safe

      Doesn't really say anything about protecting people

      Wat.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    41. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by Parker+Lewis · · Score: 1

      CIA is expected to spy on people being investigated, i.e., possible criminals and enemies of the state. Not fucking ignoring the right to privacy at all.

    42. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure all acts of espionage are classed as treason.

      "Pretty sure" is pretty weak.

      The "classes" of treason are what I cited above, directly from the Constitution, and explains precisely why Edward Snowden could not be charged with treason.

      He did not declare war against the United States. The last time that happened was the Civil War.

      He did not aid any enemies because the United States has no list of enemies. The last list was WWII.

      Edward Snowden is charged with, among other things, espionage.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    43. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by jxander · · Score: 1

      I haven't read through all 8000+ pages of the latest dump, but I couldn't find anything that outlined specific programs, plans or even intentions to use these tools on American citizens on American soil. Can we assume that someone will misuse the tools to spy on their ex? Probably. But that's just an assumption.

      Until we have some evidence to prove otherwise, all we're left with is CIA doing CIA shit. They're a spy organization building spy tools. Color me shocked.

      --
      This signature is false.
    44. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Darundal · · Score: 1

      Unless information comes out that says the CIA is performing surveillance on americans on american soil, then yes, I am assuming that the CIA is using the information in here to actually do their job. Which is to spy. Pretty much everything that has been released from Vault 7 is basically information saying "the CIA is doing it's job" and "here's roughly how the CIA is doing it's job." The NSA leaks on the other hand showed an agency that was operating well outside of it's traditionally understood role by performing massive dragnet surveillance effectively against every single american and other person on american soil through the use of secret court rulings, novel legal interpretations and a decent mix of "why the fuck not"-sterism. I could very well believe these tools, if specific other agencies have them, could be used against americans. However I very much doubt the CIA has been sharing. Simply because part of the reason these things work is that others don't know they have them, and sharing these things or even offering to help other agencies by offering to let others have the fruits gleaned from using them could let information out about their existence.

    45. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      The media found out the CIA was spying on journalists and they didn't seem to give a shit about that.

      Two predominant reasons: First, some journalists are partisan cheerleaders for one political party and/or a particular ideological/political agenda.

      Second, they're all aware that Michael Hastings was killed and the story revealed in the manner it was in order to set an example for other journalists of what happens to the extremely "bothersome" journalists, and they also know they're all being monitored.

      The pressure as an average journalist to just keep your head down and your mouth shut, write the 'safe' stories and collect a paycheck, is intense.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    46. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Sigmon · · Score: 1

      No, you listen here, asshat. That 'radio shock jock' did NOT invent any stinking steaming pile of bullshit. Mark levin was talking about stories reported as fact in main-stream news sources such as the New York Times with headlines along the lines of: 'Wiretap Data Reveals Trump Had Contact with Russian Operatives'. So, which is it? Is the New York Times (and other main stream news outlets) bullshit? Or was the Obama administration spying on the opposition political party? Those are your choices. There are no others.

    47. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by lgw · · Score: 1

      There is nothing less credible in the modern world than a journalist claiming anonymous sources. Oh, I can totally believe there's some petty domestic spying that goes on, of the "spy on your girlfriend" sort, maybe even a group trying to take down a president, as happened to Nixon, but spying beyond such abuse by individual agents? I assume the CIA has enough work to keep it busy abroad.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    48. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by jpaine619 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      CIA is expected to spy on people being investigated, i.e., possible criminals and enemies of the state. Not fucking ignoring the right to privacy at all.

      Hey look, another person who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. By law, the CIA is specifically prohibited from collecting foreign intelligence concerning the domestic activities of US citizens. Its mission is to collect information related to foreign intelligence and foreign counterintelligence. By direction of the president in Executive Order 12333 of 1981 and in accordance with procedures approved by the Attorney General, the CIA is restricted in the collection of intelligence information directed against US citizens. Collection is allowed only for an authorized intelligence purpose; for example, if there is a reason to believe that an individual is involved in espionage or international terrorist activities. The CIA's procedures require senior approval for any such collection that is allowed, and, depending on the collection technique employed, the sanction of the Director of National Intelligence and Attorney General may be required. These restrictions on the CIA have been in effect since the 1970s.

    49. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by rabitd · · Score: 2

      Actually there's a third option you're overlooking. Trump was not targeted but the Russians were. If you call someone who's phone is tapped (Russian Diplomat) that doesn't mean YOUR phones have been tapped, but your conversation will still get recorded and logged anyway. Same as if you phone a mobster who's phone has been tapped you're going to get recorded.

    50. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      Second, they're all aware that Michael Hastings was killed

      Paranoid delusional right-wing conspiracy theorist plows his car into a tree at high speed after entire family notes that he was straight up off the fucking rails, and he was killed by the jackbooted thugs over at the Obama administration through the FBI controlled by a Republican, and outed by a lifelong Progressive saying it's plausible.

      Seems legit. Keep up the good work, Truth Seeker.

    51. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure all acts of espionage are classed as treason.

      Unfortunately, your confidence is misplaced, because you are flat out wrong.
      Espionage is espionage, and though it can be a capital crime, it is not treason, and in fact has a lower bar to be met than treason in burden of proof.

      This is because treason is the one crime actually defined in the US constitution, specifically to prevent fuckwits from calling everyone who disagrees with them a traitor.

    52. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by AxeTheMax · · Score: 1

      So long as the CIA isn't spying domestically, I personally don't care what means they use.

      This slippery slope has only one end, but of course you don't think about it.

    53. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Why do they have to? The NSA and FBI seem to be quite happy to do it, en masse. The only reason for the CIA to do it would be to get their own copy of the info.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    54. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Ahh the joys of American exceptionalism and delusions. No, it is still very naughty when the US breaks other countries laws and no, it is still wrong to rape and kill people even when they are outside the US and no, just because US law says it is legal, does not make it legal and well and no, don't bitch and threaten war when other countries do it.

      Most people said nothing because they already are pretty aware it is going on and things are already changing with a view to correcting those gross abuses.

      Everyone realises that the core of the program is to spy upon every potential politician or political activists and to blackmail them into serving the demands of the US military Industrial complex, specifically the North American Territorial Occupation farce - NATO and it's intelligence services tied to contractors and the CIA. Then only reason, to serve the high profits of the forever war. Besides the fun stuff is yet to come, they were quite clear that you have only seem 1% so far. Honestly you want public interest, you need to realise some of the really interesting stuff and name names. I am sure a lot of victims would not give one crap about being exposed for being spied on for all sorts of weird bullshit reasons. It's becoming like a badge of honour to be shown to be a victim of spy on everyone stupidity, to have the NSA, CIA and NATO on you arse, they spy and you mock, now what could be more fun than that.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    55. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      So it can set the clock automatically when the power goes out? So that you can leave something in it and turn it on when you're nearly home? Because you're a moron? I suspect the third reason is probably the most common, but the other two are more likely to appear in marketing literature.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    56. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by tunkamerica · · Score: 1

      a semi-colon? are you sure you want to die on that bridge?

    57. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by Parker+Lewis · · Score: 1

      So, did you read the news in the latest years, mainly WikiLeaks mentioning CIA spying all conversations they can?

    58. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      I know you don't honestly believe that bullshit you've been spoon fed do you?

    59. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by sudon't · · Score: 1

      Right. There was little to care about in this data. The Snowden leaks were quite different.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    60. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Ahh the joys of American exceptionalism and delusions

      That's not at all what American exceptionalism means.

      Everyone realises that the core of the program is to spy upon every potential politician or political activists and to blackmail them into serving the demands of the US military Industrial complex, specifically the North American Territorial Occupation farce - NATO and it's intelligence services tied to contractors and the CIA.

      I can mostly agree with that. But the question is "why aren't people freaking over Vault 7" and I gave you the answer: Vault 7 (part 1) doesn't contain any evidence of the bad stuff you're talking about. If it does, please link me to the relevant documents.

      Now I'm eagerly hoping part 2 will contain something like "here's the transcript of a phone call we illegally intercepted between Senator Bumblefuck and John Defensecontractorman." But part 1 doesn't have anything like that, so it's a yawn for the general public.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    61. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      None of that made any sense. Also, you know that "tired and poor" shit is just a poem written by some lady, right? It's cute but has nothing to do with American policy or culture.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    62. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      But what exactly do you propose we do, based on information in Vault 7 part 1. "Aha! Thanks to document A, we now know the CIA violated law B and Constitutional principle C!" Please fill in A, B, and C for me. And maybe what action, D, we should take in response.

      This thread:

      Me: "I don't like the CIA, but there's nothing damning in Vault 7 so far."

      Slashdot: "Be angry!"

      Me: "About what specifically?"

      Slashdot: "Things!!!!"

      Help me out here. Sure, fuck the CIA in general, but what about Vault 7 (so far) is fuckworthy?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    63. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by tbannist · · Score: 1

      He did not declare war against the United States. The last time that happened was the Civil War.

      Are you sure? What about North Korea, Al'Quaeda and Daesh? As far as I understand, North Korea is still at war with the United States, and both Al'Quaeda and Daesh have declared holy war against the United States.

      I'm pretty sure your conclusion is correct, since even if those three qualify as "enemies of the United States", Snowden did not specifically aid them. I'm just not sure all of your premises are entirely correct.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    64. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by tbannist · · Score: 1

      keep our Nation safe

      Doesn't really say anything about protecting people

      Wat.

      You need to read the entire clause, if you want to actually understand what you're reading:

      safeguarding the secrets that help keep our Nation safe

      That's not the same as protecting people.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    65. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      That's not the same as protecting people.

      Kinda similar, right? And remember I said their "alleged" purpose.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    66. Re: Because most people already assume the worst by LinuxLuver · · Score: 1

      I already don't vote for people who think spying on everyone is OK. Until more people do the same, there isn't much people who do care can do.

      --
      Only boring people are ever bored.
    67. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      My premises is a direct quote from the Constitution.

      I'm sure it's entirely correct.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    68. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      There's no need to assassinate the character of Mr. Assange, he is doing a swell job himself with all lying, backstabbing behavior etc.

      This is sarcasm, no? Brining up the subject character assassination and then engaging in a round of ratfucking character assassination in the same breath.

    69. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Well if you want me to be shocked and outraged then you need to show me them using them against Americans.

      They're willing to spy on everything from the personal cell phones of allied heads of state, to soldiers having phone sex with their spouses back home while on deployment, to laundrying illegally gathered information through "fusion centers" in order to prosecute people domestically - and you thing they aren't hacking American TV's without warrants?

      In that case, sorry to hear you've been struck with a terminal case of willful dumbfuckery.

    70. Re:Because most people already assume the worst by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Look, I agree they're doing these things, almost certainly. I'm saying Vault 7 doesn't prove it.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  2. They don't want you to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These were things the Obama admin were in charge of. The press doesn't want to cover it

    1. Re:They don't want you to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      These were things the Obama admin were in charge of.

      I don't see the Trump administration doing anything to shut it down. Or doing much of anything at all, really, other than playing a lot of golf, but that's another topic.

    2. Re:They don't want you to know by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      That's the problem. This crap is bipartisan.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    3. Re:They don't want you to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Funny. Depending on which makes Trump look worse, people either say he is ruining American or is doing nothing at all.

      Proof that facts are not relevant and mod point distribution shows it.

    4. Re:They don't want you to know by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No, they correctly know that people who understand what it is the CIA does don't CARE who the president is or was.

      Seriously nothing has come out that isn't expressly in the CIA's charter. This toolset is like pointing to a plumber's oxytorch and ladder and shouting "See! Be outraged!"

      If you insist about partisanship then at least point at Roosevelt who created the agency. But then none of the subsequent red presidents abolished it either.

    5. Re:They don't want you to know by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      He's had two months, you twat. Your guy had 8 years to fuck everything up. Well, in addition to the guy before that having 8 years to fuck everything up, and the guy before him with 8 years...

    6. Re:They don't want you to know by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Is the fact that Barack Obama was President of the United States from 2009-2017 a conspiracy theory now?

      I'm pretty sure that I read on Brietbart that it was actually John McCain who was president for the 8 last years, but the Fake News media is covering it up!

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  3. You are wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON. I. KNOW. has commented on Vault#7

    It is simply not being reported.

    1. Re:You are wrong by Yunzil · · Score: 1, Troll

      Wow, all three of the people in your bubble commented on it?!

    2. Re:You are wrong by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 1

      It is simply not being reported.

      Yeah, definitely the most non-reported story of 2017.

      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
    3. Re:You are wrong by gravewax · · Score: 1

      maybe in the USA? it is certainly being reported all over the world and has spent many days on every news broadcast and the front page of every news site.

    4. Re:You are wrong by grcumb · · Score: 1

      EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON. I. KNOW. has commented on Vault#7

      It is simply not being reported.

      That's empirically false, as others have noted.

      I think the explanation is vastly simpler than that: Hark back to the Last Week Tonight show when John Oliver warned the world that the NSA could see their dick pics. It was a magisterial take down.

      What he didn't count on, though, was that the majority of the population is actually okay with total strangers seeing their dick pics. The thing that makes them nervous, uncomfortable and afraid is when their family and friends see their dick pics. The NSA so far has largely avoided that scenario, and so, apparently, have the CIA.

      I'm not excusing this gross legal and constitutional overreach. I'm just saying people care, but not in the abstract. They care in the particular.

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
  4. This "leak" concerns expected activity by drnb · · Score: 2

    This recent "leak" concerns expected activity, and legal activity, the CIA possessing the technical means to gather intelligence. The 2003 leak concerned domestic surveillance by agencies prohibited from performing domestic surveillance. In short, the public expects the CIA to be able to break into an iPhone.

    1. Re:This "leak" concerns expected activity by Carewolf · · Score: 2

      The leak was about these tools being given to third parties who leak and sell them.. Are you sure it is legal for mercenaries to do this? And two why do you think CIA needs mercenaries? Could it be to get around their limitation of not being allowed to spy on Americans themselves?

    2. Re:This "leak" concerns expected activity by drnb · · Score: 1

      That contractors work with US intelligence is not a surprise either, again the Snowden story. With proper security clearances and contracts signed it is most likely perfectly legal for these contractors to have access to these tools, or to be the ones who actually developed these tools for the government.
      And overly broad access to data and/or tools, again nothing new as Manley and Snowden demonstrate.

    3. Re:This "leak" concerns expected activity by Zemran · · Score: 1

      Reality does not make good dramatic headlines. This latest leak actually does not contain anything for people to get excited about. The CIA researched a lot of stuff. Mildly interesting. Nowhere is there any mention in the text of any surveillance taking place. They just did a lot of research, as they should. They found out what bad people can do, as they should. The fact that they were doing their job does and finding out how such things work does not make a good headline but imply that they are doing it and try to get a reaction..

      --
      I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
  5. Enemy of the State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It was fiction in 1998... and now it appears to be all too real.

        http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660

    The only question that remains is how autocratic are those in power to manipulate these capabilities to their benefit and at the expense of the public welfare.

  6. because wikileaks is a Russian propaganda tool by js3 · · Score: 1, Funny

    I think most people have figured out wikileaks only seems to be pushing an agenda with their leaks

    --
    did you forget to take your meds?
    1. Re:because wikileaks is a Russian propaganda tool by Midnight_Falcon · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure if it's a Russian agenda so much as a man who started out pretty weird and contrarian, having lived in an embassy where he is somewhat disliked for 5 years and pretending to be a perpetual victim of the powerful, staggering in any direction he can by releasing any juicy information that comes in -- regardless who it harms. It just so happens he gets more information from US sources (leakers) than Russian ones, and doesn't even speak Russian himself to read/understand Russian leaks. So, he staggers in that direction to keep himself in the news. But it doesn't seem as well-thought-out as having a real agenda to push.

    2. Re:because wikileaks is a Russian propaganda tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How about you leak some information on the russian government to wikileaks.
      Then when they don't release it you get to say they are Russian propaganda.
      Until then the worst you can say is they don't have anyone leaking from within russia.

    3. Re:because wikileaks is a Russian propaganda tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Clinton failed to appease, or even appear to try to give a damn about, important swing states.
      To the surprise of no one paying attention, the swing states went red.
      This is the how and why of Clinton's loss.
      Get over it, the conspiracy crap is embarrassing.

    4. Re:because wikileaks is a Russian propaganda tool by js3 · · Score: 1

      look if you Russians are going to astroturf at least have the decency to create an account.

      People don't care because the source is suspect. Now lay off all that clinton nonsense (and whatever else you're smoking in your gulag)

      --
      did you forget to take your meds?
    5. Re:because wikileaks is a Russian propaganda tool by admin7087 · · Score: 2

      I'm pretty sure it's just Julian Assange's propaganda tool. But you're right, there may be a bit of a 'leak fatigue', especially when the leak does not reveal a scandal but rather practices that everybody expects of an intelligence agency. I mean, c'mon, this leak even contains a useful little GIT tutorial...

  7. Sure, we all knew... by pablo_max · · Score: 1

    But I do not think that's the reason no one really cares. I think most people don't trust wikileaks.
    Julian is clearly a complete and total fuck head with a political agenda.
    Personally, I would have a hard time believing anything released by that jack ass has not been carefully cherry picked.

    At this stage, everyone knows the US government is spying on the everything they do. Most people just don't care. Everyone also knows that wikileaks guy is a fart muffin. So... they also don't care.

    1. Re:Sure, we all knew... by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      I think most people don't trust wikileaks.

      Only hyper-partisan leftists. Nothing WikiLeaks has ever released has been shown to be false.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    2. Re: Sure, we all knew... by Megol · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't one need to be retarded to think the CIA wouldn't do their job? Really...

    3. Re:Sure, we all knew... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      'Collateral murder' was edited in a very dishonest way. It wasn't CGIed, but the conclusion they pushed was clearly false.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:Sure, we all knew... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Only hyper-partisan leftists. Nothing WikiLeaks has ever released has been shown to be false.

      I'm a hyper-anti-partisan ultra-leftist and I don't strictly trust Wikileaks. I trust that most of what they release will be genuine. I don't trust that they don't have an agenda. I don't decide how to feel about their releases until other sources have gone through them and made intelligent commentary.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Sure, we all knew... by lgw · · Score: 1

      So you hate wikileaks because ... it revealed your guy was dirty?

      Stop rooting for your favorite team, and start rooting for a less corrupt government.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    6. Re:Sure, we all knew... by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Everyone has an agenda. Anyone telling you they don't have an agenda is lying to you. Or lying to themselves.

      But there's no reason not to trust that something WikiLeaks releases is genuine. No one even credibly refutes WikiLeak's releases. They just attack the source.

      The instant WikiLeaks releases something that's shown to be false I'll stop trusting them. In the meantime I find myself shaking my head in disbelief at Slashdotters trusting the CIA more than WikiLeaks. Jesus Christ what a difference and election makes, eh?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    7. Re:Sure, we all knew... by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      In what way?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    8. Re:Sure, we all knew... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Editing out the heavily armed men and fire fight on the ground.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    9. Re:Sure, we all knew... by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      I guess it's been awhile since I saw it. I remembered that stuff being in there. Maybe I watched the unedited version?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  8. Most people haven't heard about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Most "normal" people the summary refers to have never heard of the Wikileaks release concerning the CIA. In fact, I am pretty sure if I took an informal poll of friends and family most of them (8/10 at least) wouldn't have any idea what Wikileaks is.

    The majority of people do not consider whether they are being spied on, it doesn't occur to them at all. It's not necessarily that they don't care, but they are simply unaware it's an option. If you don't follow tech news this is not something that comes up on people's radar.

    Sometimes I will tell friends about hacks that can break into phones or ways that government or companies can intercept traffic. A few might express concern, but not enough to do anything about it, the spying is "out of sight, out of mind", it doesn't affect them. Most others think I'm just being paranoid or making stuff up.

  9. Important lessons learned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Remember, the best way to cover up information in the age of the internet is not to censor it, but to present so many conflicting and mutually exclusive sets of information that the casual observer doesn't have a baseline from which to judge truth or fiction. All they will be able to know is that they are being lied to -- but they will be incapable of telling who is lying or how much of what they are hearing is lies. Poison any legitimate leak with factually false information and the entire thing becomes suspect.

  10. Faceless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    No one cared because it had no "mascot" like we had with Snowden or Manning.
      I only heard CNN mention the dump for a couple days then seemingly dropped it entirely in favor of more trump. So either the alphabet guys are kindly suggesting that the media limit its coverage, or most Americans don't care unless there's a celebrity figure behind it. I'm guessing it's the latter, because out of the possible answers that one makes me facepalm the hardest.

  11. Re: who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Shut up you CIA shlll. This has nothing to do with left vs right, and everything to do with us all losing our liberty.

  12. No it's not because we assumed they already do by ipb · · Score: 1

    I'ts because nearly everything in the release was already known ancient exploits or techniques. None of this is new.

    And because WikiLeaks, while it had potential at one time, is irrevocably tainted by the a-hole in charge.

  13. Geeks have known for years ... by Martin+S. · · Score: 1

    We've known for years that any wired device connected to the net is vulnerable. Changing the end use of the device does not change a thing regards security.

    The majority of us also know the what comes out of his mouth is complete bullshit.

  14. Perfect Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is why letting an election get decided by popular vote is so damned dangerous.

    Few understand the underlying issues and, the few that do, even less care.

    People make no sense to me.

    Trump is elected and the people riot like chimps. The CIA is hacking and spying on everything under the fucking sun with no oversight and the response is " meh ".

  15. Who was shocked? by ocsibrm · · Score: 1

    I may have missed it, but did the leaks say the CIA was actually using this stuff illicitly? If not, then it's on par with someone leaking that the Army has tanks. Well... yeah, it's par for the course.

  16. What exactly are people going to do? by ewibble · · Score: 1

    So you are angry whats the next step? write an angry post? go on a protest? what is that going to achieve at best they will say they are going to stop doing it and go on doing the same thing in secret. Maybe a few people will lose there jobs, but they will be replaced by others that are just as unethical.

    Until people stop having irrational fears of terrorist, communist, immigrants, homosexuals, witches, ... (pick your favorite group that is going to "destroy" civilization) we will allow agencies the CIA to have too much power, and once anyone has too much power they will abuse it.

  17. Re:who cares by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

    In part because they're hosted in Russia.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  18. Isn't This Stuff Their Job? by Malggi · · Score: 1

    Isn't developing and using tools like this kind of their job?

    I mean they should never use this stuff against American citizens or without a warrant and due process, etc, etc.... But complaining we have the tools necessary to turn some warlord's cellphone into a microphone is like complaining about how the army has drones that can fly a grenade through his car window.

    I mean if anything maybe these tools will be kind of useful. "Hey, before we bomb that large group of people over there, turn on their cell phone cameras and make sure it's not a sweet sixteen party.

  19. Apples and Orange by slashdice · · Score: 1

    WikiLeaks is all bark and no bite. All cowboy and no cattle. All sizzle and no steak. All rape and no recourse.

    --
    Copyright (c) 1990 - 2014 Dice. All rights reserved. Use of this comment is subject to certain Terms and Conditions.
    1. Re:Apples and Orange by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      All rape and no recourse.

      That's because he's hiding in the Ecuadorian embassy

  20. Is it apathy? Or helplessness? by daemonhunter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What are we supposed to do about it?

    The real issue isn't the fact that the CIA/NSA/ [insert bureau here] can do these things. The issue is that they can't be held accountable for it.

    We saw this in the financial crash of '08 (albeit in the private sector) as well: no one who is actually responsible for these things will ever see jail time. This won't end anyone's career. There's just not much the American people can do about it, and I think there's a sense among the general populace that they know this, even if only on a subconscious level. It's not apathy. It's a helpless resignation.

    1. Re:Is it apathy? Or helplessness? by k6mfw · · Score: 2

      Under the SHEEPLE system, govt would have TAXED YOUR ASS INTO POVERTY

      uhmmm, no. Poor people don't pay much taxes because they don't have much money, that is why they are poor. What kills is high living expenses. Housing pricing more and more people out (i.e. lots more sleeping in cars and under bridges). Good healthy food much more expensive than unhealthy junk food. And damned if you get ill medical expenses can bankrupt you. The election theme was to "take back the government and give that power to the people." Yeah right, put a bunch of billionaires as if they will do anything except give themselves tax breaks.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    2. Re:Is it apathy? Or helplessness? by daemonhunter · · Score: 2

      I appreciate the sentiment of this. I truly do.
      Self-sustaining, anarchistic self-governance sounds fantastic.

      As long as the whole world moves to it.

      The problem with anarchy is (paradoxically) that governments are a necessary evil because other governments exist. The moment America descends into chaotic anarchy or ascends into a utopian anarchy, every other nation on earth will see it as weakness and attack. Russia will take out a century of cold war hostilities. China. Iran. ISIS. North Korea might even take a swing. And that's just with today's "villains."

      And none of that even supposes the problems with anarchy in practicality. Anarchy only works so long as the table is level, so long as everyone holds equal force and equal voice. The moment two people group together to better get their way, it starts an arms race that leads us back to right where we're sitting. The moment one person finds enough leverage to overturn the vote on that road, or pays off enough people to pass the vote regardless, the system is broken again. Our current government is, for better or worse, the end result of an attempt to actualize a utopian anarchy. After all, wasn't America founded on the ideals of self-determination and freedom from power hungry tyrants?

      The problem isn't government. The problem is people. Or rather, the problem is that the greed and corruption exist within people, and in fact cannot exist outside of people. Government is only corrupt because it is a product of people working together to achieve an end, and people are inherently corrupt.

      And yes, the system is rigged, in ways far deeper and more pervasive than any Trump dreamed up during the campaign. And yes, voting doesn't meaningfully change anything above the local level, if even there. And this is, I think, where the hopelessness stems from: people know that it's broken, but the monumental task of fixing it will likely topple our government rather than reform it, and that will likely get us killed before we could recover from it. For the survival of the average American citizen, a broken system is better than no system at all. Because of the enemies we have made (or nations who have decided we are enemies regardless of our actions)...a coup or a revolution would mean war on our soil. People are beginning to realize that fixing our government means the deaths of millions, and not from a civil war.

    3. Re:Is it apathy? Or helplessness? by daemonhunter · · Score: 1

      You are absolutely correct. It falls within their job description. Perhaps I should have said "the problem is that they cannot be held accountable when they misuse those abilities."

      Much as the whole idea of espionage leaves a sour taste in my mouth, I understand its necessity. But you're spot on in that the NSA got lazy, and they slipped the scope of their jurisdiction, and they were never brought to heel over it. Truth be told, there were a lot of politicians drooling over the potential that technology held, and were sad to see it brought to light – those same politicians we supposedly elected to protect and serve our interests. And no amount of waving the 'national security' flag will ever make this sort of mass surveillance in my – or anyone's – best interests.

    4. Re:Is it apathy? Or helplessness? by Altus · · Score: 1

      I don't actually think that is the issue at all.

      The reason you can't do anything about it is that these security holes exist and there are people who are very good at finding them. If the CIA were disbanded tomorrow do you think that somehow these exploits would cease to be developed? Other countries have the ability to create them, according to the dump several of them actually come from criminal black hats. The exploits are going to exists, the question is, does a branch of our government have them, or just other governments and criminals.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

  21. I don't mean to alarm you, but... by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    The US military can call in a strike on any position in the world, with 1 meter accuracy, and deliver a deadly payload in less than 6 hours. 2 hours to most populated areas. They can wipe out an entire city in a day, even without nukes. They have nearly invisible fortresses both above and below the water all over the globe. They have aircraft which carry nuclear weapons which are nearly invisible to radar and can circumnavigate the globe without ever having to land.

    That's insane. And yet we don't react when we find out because, even for the stuff we didn't know for certain, we kind of figured they could probably do it. CIA is the same way, it's just not talked about as much. Most people hadn't hear of (or dind't know much of) the NSA back when Snowden dumped his data) so it was a surprise. The CIA is not a surprise. To anyone. They may be secret, but they're not shrouded in mystery.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:I don't mean to alarm you, but... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Also, if they have physical access to your Samsung TV (for the USB based hack), they could add their own microphones throughout the body, wired into a battery so unplugging it doesn't turn it off.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  22. Alarm fatigue - People just don't care any more by ninthbit · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's mostly alarm fatigue. Constantly we're berated with news about how our rights are eroding and the government is working against us. While much of it is very true, until it extends to the point of interfering with the common citizens daily life, they won't care.

    People are sheep. You can shave their coats and even pick off a few to slaughter, as long as the heard is large enough to feel anonymous, they really have no reaction. It's not until the sheep feel like they're the next in line do they care.

    1. Re:Alarm fatigue - People just don't care any more by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Yep. That's my take on the whole situation as well. You've nailed it.

  23. Whay should I? by flink · · Score: 1

    Is it a shock that our covert HUMINT foreign intelligence agency has a pile of tools for covertly gathering human intelligence? No. I'd be more surprised if they didn't have stuff like this. These tools are useful for the kind of targeted, one-off, POI-focused surveillance that we want our spies to be doing, rather than the sweeping, rights-trampling dragnets we've been seeing from the FBI and NSA.

    I'm mostly upset that this stuff was mishandled and leaked, not that it exists.

    So am I upset that our spies are spying? No, no I'm not.

    1. Re:Whay should I? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Use a one time pad system on paper.
      Never re use the codes.
      That will get your privacy back.
      When US brands tell you their hardware and software is safe don't trust them.
      Re 'These tools are useful for the kind of targeted,"
      The Automated Implant Branch (AIB) work is not "focused", "one-off". Thats malware.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:Whay should I? by Lakitu · · Score: 1

      No i'm not fucking explaining and arguing it to you, you lazy bastard,

      This release, and Wikileaks "recent" release about the CIA "infiltrating" French elections are transparent ploys by the attention-seeking Assange to focus news on his possible eviction from the Ecuador embassy, which both remaining Ecuadorian candidates have promised to do.

      This release has had all kinds of editorialized end-of-the-world dystopian future headlines, including falsely smearing quality apps like Signal with nothing to back it up besides a link to a giant dump of data. For all of Assange's preaching, he doesn't believe a word he's saying: he just thinks people should listen to him. Their own summary even betrays their shortcomings:

      Has WikiLeaks already 'mined' all the best stories?
      No. WikiLeaks has intentionally not written up hundreds of impactful stories to encourage others to find them and so create expertise in the area for subsequent parts in the series. They're there. Look.

      The cult of wikileaks is seeking new members! No time to fucking explain and argue it to flink.

      The "release" about the CIA "infiltrating" the 2012 French election was especially pathetic. I'm sure infiltrating an election sounds spooky to people who don't want to read through thousands of pages of documents but all it really amounts to is reading their newspapers and getting "inside-the-beltway" info so as to not be shocked by the outcome.

    3. Re:Whay should I? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      That's fine and dandy to say you expect the CIA to do this, and it doesn't bother you. But, you seem to think they aren't doing this to YOU and every other citizen as well. And, you'd only be partially right. They set up agreements. MI6 spies on American citizens and we spy on British citizens.. Everything is all legal.. And then they swap the data.. Sure, the CIA didn't spy on you directly, but they still have everything.. They followed the letter of the law, but they stomped the shit out of the spirit..

  24. I care. by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    I care a lot.

    I'm waiting to see what will be done about it, by the new sheriff. Maybe nothing, maybe little, but... Wait and see.

    We get to vote them out again in a little while.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  25. Here's a theory by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Most people don't care. They never did, not even back in 2013.

    The difference now is back in 2013 the media needed headlines. Now they're more focused on Trumps spelling mistakes in his tweets.

  26. Re: who cares by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    But right vs left is such a good way of distracting the people! After all, both sides of the political establishment are very different in who they want to give the things that they steal from you to.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  27. Fault of the biased media? by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

    Maybe there are 'more interesting' things going on, but in the last week have asked more then a few of my non - tech industry friends if they have heard about the new wiki leaks drop and non of them have. Frankly it just isn't being reported. That is one of the problems with our modern media, they serve as a filter for what is important but are driven by political ideology even more so then what sells and certainly have no real way of determine or interest in what is and isn't important to people. Many people are appalled when they hear about this drop, but it has been dreadfully under reported because the trump administration is much more salacious.

    --
    âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
  28. Re:Or... by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    In China and Saudi Arabia, the government doesn't just control the media, it is the media.

  29. Gee by whodunit · · Score: 1

    I see the media is in full-out damage control.

  30. Hacking tools and using these tools against ... by drnb · · Score: 1

    Are you really so naive as to think they're only using these tools against non-Americans?

    Having hacking tools and using these tools against Americans are two very different things. The former is what was leaked and its exactly the sort of tools the CIA is expect to have in order to perform its mission. If and when the later is shown the public will show greater interest, as they did with the 2013 revelations.

  31. Not Ignored by the Media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've seen coverage on The Blaze, Fox News, Daily Wire, Daily Wire, NPR, my local talk radio guys, my local cable news guys, etc.

    People saying "it's been ignored by the media" probably haven't been watching the media at all. It has been covered. Not 24/7, and not exactly accurately (some networks are better than others in this regard), but all of them have been talking about it.

  32. Doesn't move the needle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The village is being terrorized by a tribble-topped wackaloon and his minions, and people wonder why we're not paying more attention to a gov't agency doing exactly what we assume they do?

  33. Targets matter by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    People cared about Snowden because NSA overreach affected virtually every US citizen. What NSA was caught doing is ILLEGAL.

    Everyone assumes CIA hoards 0-days to be used for espionage purposes against OTHER countries. This is why CIA exists. CIA brass has been publically talking about the cooption of smart* products for such purposes for a number of years.

    If there is evidence in one of these leaks of CIA spying on US citizens without a warrant this would be certainly be worthy of more attention.

    If CIA was for example caught bulk hacking everyone's smart TV's and recording everything said this would certainly be newsworthy and most likely lead to legal repercussions for the individuals involved.. or maybe not... nobody at NSA went to jail for stealing everyone's phone records.

  34. It's their job... by grahamtriggs · · Score: 1

    Nobody cares, because the intelligence community is supposed to be able to get information that the "bad dudes" want to keep from them.

  35. Not true, I personally called both of my Senators by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I was very upset by the latest round of Wikileaks. It is clear that our security agencies are not making us safer. As we build western civilization on technology and the Internet of Things IoT, we have to know that our technology can not be used against us. This has the potential to kill new markets like autonomous vehicle because in a recent poll, 70% of women to no trust self driving cars. I imagine with the Wikileaks revelations of using a hacked car for the "perfect" assassination, that this percentage is going to climb.

    This needs to stop. When a fatal security flaw is found in a product, the vendor needs to be notified so that the problem can be fixed. If we have the exploit, so does everyone else.

    Worse, the latest wikileaks dump is shows the unprofessional-ism of the cyber unit. It looks like 15-year olds are running a spy agency. Lastly, the most unforgivable thing is not being able to hang on to your toys. It is bad enough all these security holes are being exploited, but to lose control of your tools is unforgivable.

    I urge everyone to call their senators and leave a message or talk to a staffer. This sh*t needs to stop. The senators control the purse strings and they can stop it.

  36. Only in America, Baby... by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    The civilized world has at least a base level of universal health care for everyone within their country. We find that gets in the way of profit so we won't allow it to happen. This isn't a partisan issue, either - the health insurance industry owns politicians of every flavor and invests heavily to ensure that this does not change.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  37. Re:Russian Fingerprints by Matt.Battey · · Score: 1

    If the CIA can do this, then I guarantee that China, Russia, India, Israel, and many of the EU countries can as well. False flag tactics have been a thing for centuries, and IMHO is a key component in counter intelligence activities.

    On a personal note, it's also why I have a very hard time integrating "definitive proof" that this group or that group were responsible for a hack, doc, swat, or DDOS attack. Even the ones where politicians claim they initiated the action...

  38. Re:Not true, Qz is just trying to white wash by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Re "The young people know how to do this stuff."
    The problem for the CIA is the "The young" are all over social media and any can buy all the years of social media data from the private sector.
    A US person entering the State department might be on some type of social media. Its hard to hide their skill set and place CIA deep in an embassy if the other nation has counter surveillance.
    So the CIA has to follow the NSA into nations digitally. When a computer collects data domestically it not illegal domestically as no human is listening in real time?
    The post Church Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... color of law acts that still saw domestic spying do not work with young people.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  39. Re:Who cares what 'most people' think? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    The IT professionals that failed to secure their hardware and software when working for big US brands?
    New brands with smarter staff will secure their new brands hardware and software and offer strong crypto.
    The "average user" will then have options.
    Buy into a few more decades of US brands that offered the CIA a way in? Or support a new brand thats more secure as the hired skilled IT professionals?
    Stay with the brands that lost control of their hardware and software or try a brand that can secure their products?

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  40. The Biggest Shock of the Whole Thing by Kreegalor · · Score: 1

    Was that someone was able to get all the documentation and source codes out of the CIA's hands and them not knowing about it. There wasn't anything in there that we didn't already know or expect. Just the fact that supposedly 80,000 pages of documents (when its all said and done) got loose into the wild. For an Agency who's mission is secrecy and keeping information quiet, they sure messed that one up.

  41. Re:Russian Fingerprints by Lakitu · · Score: 1

    Not wanting people to find out it was CIA is not equal to framing another state. Most of it has to do with simple code reuse and developer efficiency by re-appropriating existing or stolen malware.

    Confidence in who did what in terms of state-backed hacking is already bordering on impossible. Nobody really knows who did Stuxnet, for example, except for the fact that the US and Israel practically brag about it every chance they get and that its target was Iran.

  42. It wasn't on a Private Email Server. by NReitzel · · Score: 1

    If the leak had been about a Totally Illegal Private Email Server, then people would have chanted to "Lock Her Up"

    --

    Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.

  43. Difficult for most people to understand... by matbury6017 · · Score: 1

    ...the risk that the CIA is presenting to the USA. By hoarding vulnerabilities in operating systems and software and then developing tools to exploit them, they're making the internet very insecure; as Bruce Schneier puts it, today's top secret government hacking tools are tomorrow's organised crime hacking tools. Which country has the greatest economic and national security dependency on the internet and is therefore the most vulnerable to hacking tools? The USA. The CIA are quickly becoming a bunch of useless idiots to the USA and useful idiots to anyone who wants to exploit the USA (and everyone else). Expect hacking-based disruption and extortion to take a serious toll on all internet dependent economies and especially the USA's.

  44. False Assumptions by Hercules+Peanut · · Score: 1

    Is it that we do not care or is it that we are not at all surprised?

    More importantly, who feels empowered to make a difference?

  45. Declaring "victory" early is a tactic, not reality by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    Similar things were said about Snowden's revelations which continue to bear fruit for the world. Don't be fooled into believing the unexamined belief the /. headline wants you to believe—that "most people" don't care. The Democrats are sore that they lost the US presidential election, a majority of state governerships, and control over Congress. They're still pushing this undefended Russophobic idea that the Russians somehow "hacked" (to use their language) the US election. They even chummed up with the CIA to help curry favor for this notion. They're hardly interested in learning that, for instance, the CIA's "UMBRAGE" effort works to plant false evidence making it look like another party did something they actually did (one of the many interesting newsworthy items found in the WikiLeaks initial "Vault 7" leak) carries a vastly different story which challenges the Democrats' as-yet-unproven tale. Neoliberals really want to get their war with Russia on and anyone who doesn't join in that effort will find a chilly reception among the neoliberal elite right now.

    Also, there's been considerable coverage of this from around the world, but if you're only paying attention to American corporate mainstream media you will not find dissenting views that challenge a corporate narrative which stood fully behind Mrs. Clinton's 2nd failed attempt at becoming US President. Americans don't make up most of the people in the world and American mainstream media is taken less seriously these days (for good reason).

  46. /. playing both sides of the fence by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    What "most people care" about is not only not represented by mainstream corporate so-called journalists (stenographers to power, really) but that doesn't even jibe with telling people encryption works.

  47. Sure, it was not really "new" news... by martinfb · · Score: 1

    Sure, it was not really "new" news, yet it is, nonetheless, supremely alarming!
    One major contributor to the public's lack of enthused reaction is the absolute lack of real responsibility on the part of the media - especially mainstream media.

    Media has become a tool of those with the power. Electronic media, in particular, is a powerful tool that does brainwash and brow-beat the public into submission, while leaving a feeling that just hearing it is enough!

    The other issue is that most people are truly idiots. Period. Thanks, in LARGE part to ever more powerful corporations!

    --


    Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.