Slashdot Mirror


Massive US Military Social Media Spying Archive Left Wide Open In AWS S3 Buckets (theregister.co.uk)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Register: Three misconfigured AWS S3 buckets have been discovered wide open on the public internet containing "dozens of terabytes" of social media posts and similar pages -- all scraped from around the world by the U.S. military to identify and profile persons of interest. The archives were found by veteran security breach hunter UpGuard's Chris Vickery during a routine scan of open Amazon-hosted data silos, and these ones weren't exactly hidden. The buckets were named centcom-backup, centcom-archive, and pacom-archive. CENTCOM is the common abbreviation for the U.S. Central Command, which controls army operations in the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia. PACOM is the name for U.S. Pacific Command, covering the rest of southern Asia, China and Australasia.

"For the research I downloaded 400GB of samples but there were many terabytes of data up there," he said. "It's mainly compressed text files that can expand out by a factor of ten so there's dozens and dozens of terabytes out there and that's a conservative estimate." Just one of the buckets contained 1.8 billion social media posts automatically fetched over the past eight years up to today. It mainly contains postings made in central Asia, however Vickery noted that some of the material is taken from comments made by American citizens. The databases also reveal some interesting clues as to what this information is being used for. Documents make reference to the fact that the archive was collected as part of the U.S. government's Outpost program, which is a social media monitoring and influencing campaign designed to target overseas youths and steer them away from terrorism.

85 comments

  1. It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Unless they're claiming these were private posts the spooks somehow hacked into, it's just another public copy of already public data.

    1. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, this time he is doomed. This time will be his undoing. He cannot possibly survive this.

      Wait... I feel like I've heard those things before...

    2. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They see me trollin', they hatin

    3. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump is a fucked up gay pedophile!!!! He must be impeached because he eats his own shit!!

    4. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, hes just a narcistic sociopath. Credit where its due

    5. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You grab your gun and charge the White House! I'll cover you.

    6. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Wait... I feel like I've heard those things before...

      Chris Cillizza daily.

    7. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You realize "The Buck Stops Here" was just a slogan on a desk trinket and not a legal doctrine?

    8. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously slashdot? This garbage is modded up. Facebook is becoming a better source of news and discussion.

    9. Re:It was already public by aliquis · · Score: 1

      The thing is the reason I "want to think it's ok to post in public" is because I don't think my government should spy on me. At all.

      Sure they may consider it useful but ..

      What if in the US rather than saying "Oh we must have access to anything which can be encrypted" they instead said "We won't use any information gathering even if it's un-encrypted and in the public, and we won't ask anyone else for it either and such information can't be used against anyone / usage of such information would automatically free the person it was used against in court "?

      The opposite direction.

    10. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It expressed an attitude. As words do.

    11. Re:It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      is because I don't think my government should spy on me. At all.

      Dude, they weren't spying on *you*. It was "the other guy". So it's ok. Nothing to worry about. Nope.

    12. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sound like Trump grabbed your pussy. Perhaps you would have better success confessing to the public how he also raped you. The Internet is waiting.

    13. Re:It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What it?
      Insider traders, con artists, fraudsters, conspiratorists, terrorists and pederasts (and paedophiles) would rejoice, as would many other criminals once their online communications couldn't legally be used against them.

      I'm not sure that's what you meant?

      DethLok

    14. Re: It was already public by Contract+Gypsy · · Score: 0

      But it was started under Obama's watch, so stick the blame where it belongs, he just stole our privacy again... if there is still such a thing!

      --
      Life is in a state of dynamic equilibrium, it both blows and sucks
    15. Re: It was already public by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, if he ate his own shit, they'd assign him a new gender and he'd win over 1/2 the democratic voters instantly. Deep thinkers...

  2. More Obama-era spying programs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Thanks Democrats for voting that clown in. He took the Bush-era surveillance and expanded it by leaps and bounds. It's time we appoint a special prosecutor and investigate all of the abuses of the Obama administration.

    1. Re:More Obama-era spying programs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      He weaponized government agencies against US citizens and democracy.

      But since democrats are so close to communism, surveillance and dictatorship are right up their alley.

    2. Re: More Obama-era spying programs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, let's just ignore the US government manipulating our media, what could ever go wrong?

  3. S3 buckets are locked down by default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's always interesting when this happens, because it means an admin went in and opened everything up on purpose.

    1. Re:S3 buckets are locked down by default by guruevi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      a) Amazon buckets didn't always come that way, it took some pressure for Amazon to accept that this was a poor default setting.
      b) In most of these cases, it's simply incompetence - I can't get OAuth to work, let's just set it to public and hope nobody guesses the bucket name.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    2. Re:S3 buckets are locked down by default by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      In most of these cases, it's simply incompetence - I can't get OAuth to work, let's just set it to public and hope nobody guesses the bucket name.

      I want to know how people guessed the bucket name: I'm impressed that they do.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:S3 buckets are locked down by default by DivineKnight · · Score: 1

      Well, let's start with the usual suspects. Did a contractor / employee have access to it, and, I don't know, have the WeatherBug application running in the background?

  4. Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why doesn't the military store their own stuff?

    1. Re:Why use AWS? by DaHat · · Score: 4, Informative

      Same reason they don't build their own airplanes, ships, guns, etc...

    2. Re: Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the reason? Stop fucking stalling!!!

    3. Re: Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He just did but your too stupid

    4. Re: Why use AWS? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Reliance of Her Majesty the Queen and the British empire?

    5. Re:Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because it is more cost effective to have the private sector do it, as they can subsidize the cost of collection by selling the data onto other customers (marketing, foreign governments) rather than have the US army do it.

    6. Re: Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The F-35 has many problems but to my knowledge, stalling isn't one of them.

    7. Re: Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well yeah, it can't stall if it never flies.

    8. Re:Why use AWS? by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      The US mil really likes its Military–industrial complex. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...–industrial_complex
      Think of a world that allowed to US mil to spend millions on its own internal, secure networks.
      Thats billions in build and long term support contracts lost to the shareholders and outside contractors.
      What the US mil could secure for millions has been given to contractors to look after for billions. That money is gone. The once very secret and secure US mil data is.... ????

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    9. Re: Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incompetence.

    10. Re:Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      All the best storage experts smoke pot so their services have to be bought from the private sector.

      I kid, I kid.

    11. Re:Why use AWS? by DivineKnight · · Score: 2

      Money? That and if this happened on a military install, they'd be sporting an even larger black eye than they currently have ("You trusted Amazon? What's wrong with you?" vs. "Our nation's elite military 'cyber-warriors' can't secure a simple database from opportunistic h@x0rs...how the hell are they going to protect us from {enemy}?"). The first one is a gaff, the second one is a congressional inquisition into 'what exactly do you do with all that money we give you.'

    12. Re: Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Overbill by $999?

    13. Re:Why use AWS? by Solandri · · Score: 1

      There's a huge amount of inertia within the military (or government for that matter), which makes it really slow to adapt to and take advantage of changes. Technological progress is the very epitome of change, so the two make very poor bedfellows. It works much better if they simply hire someone to handle the technological part for them.

      In the mid-1990s my company was doing some ship model testing. We rented the tow tank at the U.S. Navy's David Taylor Research Center (now David Taylor Model Basin). One morning I arrived at the center and saw a bunch of what looked like washing machines piled up at the tow tank entrance. I asked our Navy guide what they were.

      "Hard drives"
      "Whoa. How old are they?"
      "I dunno, early '70s I think."
      "Wow. What's their capacity?
      "About 10 MB."
      "So they've been sitting in your warehouse all this time, and you finally decided to throw them out?"
      "Oh no, we were using them up til yesterday. Our requisition for new hard drives finally came through."
      "..."

      Not exactly the kind of organization you want building cutting-edge data storage solutions for themselves.

    14. Re:Why use AWS? by MartinG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's not a great comparison.

      Making their own planes and guns would be like making their own processors and hard drives. They would never do that.

      The question was more about why they store their data on somebody elses computers. This would be like keeping their guns in someone elses warehouse, where that somebody makes the keys and locks to that warehouse.

      --
      -- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz .@adgimnoprstu
    15. Re:Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personal experience: a DoD managed data center is 4x more expensive than a similarly accredited AWS environment.

    16. Re: Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      His too stupid what?

    17. Re:Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oh no, we were using them up til yesterday. Our requisition for new hard drives finally came through."
      "..."

      Not exactly the kind of organization you want building cutting-edge data storage solutions for themselves.

      Did it happen to occur to you that the person who said that might have been joking?

    18. Re:Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Contractors. Gov is THE biggest customer to many US companies from rental car agencies to package delivery companies. Heaven forbid the gov have its own staff to do such things. The idea is to pay twice as much for things, but then have no employee to be responsible for later with retirement/med payments. See how they justify it as a cost saving measure? And think of all the work it gives American companies... So basically that's your answer.

    19. Re:Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Making their own planes and guns would be like making their own processors and hard drives. They would never do that.

      Actually, that's exactly what we used to do. Not everything, mind you, but the military used to be far, far more involved in aircraft development, for example.

    20. Re:Why use AWS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It obviously not more cost effective .. the cost of loss is many times the any perceived savings. Just one breach/failing will wipe out tens years or more of savings.

  5. If it was on social media is it Public Domain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you can still claim copyright etc, it doesn't mean you can claim anything on social media is 'secret'. If so. this is nothing more than what every Sysadmin with half a brain has been saying... containers on machines you don't control are not secure.

  6. Re:MODERATORS ARE CENSORING POSTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is your post written by a conservative? Should it be modded down? ;)

  7. what is /. by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

    does /. count as social media, antisocial media maybe ? Anyhow, did centcom scan slashdot ? Is centcom the new UI for slashdot ?

    --
    Nullius in verba
  8. Re: But! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are trolling slashdot apparently

  9. It's like I was telling them by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If it's in the cloud, even the secure cloud, it's open.

    You may not think it is, but it is.

    And, yes, other nations do - and will - have access to it.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:It's like I was telling them by edtice1559 · · Score: 2

      As opposed to where? Completely disconnected from the Internet? Because AWS ("the cloud") is certainly a better choice than something you have to secure yourself.

    2. Re:It's like I was telling them by dontbgay · · Score: 1

      Not if the safety and security of the nation's citizenry are put in jeopardy in the process. For the money the federal government spends on security, we're not getting a good return on investment

      --
      Sig not found.
    3. Re:It's like I was telling them by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      The US government is a huge, sprawling democracy. There are some networks that actually contain things vital to national security. Those are usually entirely air-gapped and secured by the best people that the government has. After that, we have every other government function from motor vehicle registrations to lame intelligence-gathering operations like this one. Those are *very* unlikely to have competent people working on them.

    4. Re:It's like I was telling them by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      I think you mean the US government is a huge, sprawling bureaucracy. Because if it were a "democracy" it wouldn't be possible for the person with fewer votes to win the election. But in 2016, "the loser won" (to quote the loser who won).

      --
      I do not have a signature
    5. Re:It's like I was telling them by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      Yes, that is what I meant. Oops. Thanks.

  10. Unreasonable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Justice says it is only reasonable to have encryption if they can read it.

    It they can only protect it as well as this, reasonable is a sad story.

  11. "Steer them AWAY from terrorism" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, right! lol

    Or do they actuall want to un-train the terrorists that they themselvea previously recruited, financed, trained and armed? (Like the IS, or the Taliban, or even Iran, etc, etc, etc)

  12. Re: But! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hilarious and original

  13. "Spying" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you absolutely nuts? Did you not read about that guy who had fun scraping porn into AWS to test how much he could use? They have no positive ID on who owns the AWS buckets.

  14. Re: But! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks

  15. Re: MODERATORS ARE CENSORING POSTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You could follow your own advice and start learning.

  16. Told someone today... by Chewbacon · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...as my company switches to AWS Workspaces, someone asked me what AWS is. I explained it and summarized: it's a very powerful and capable platform, yet its users are perfectly capable of powerfully shooting themselves in both feet.

    --
    Chewbacon
    The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
  17. The US military hackers show their competence once by aliquis · · Score: 1

    ... again.

    I'm sure Russia is super-scared.

    As for that guy who some day suggested that all other people was inferior: https://slashdot.org/comments....
    At-least those willing to relocate to the US.. Well.. I'm pretty sure some Russian and even North Korean computer users will know their shit and could had been interested in doing something in the US too.

  18. This shouldn't have been modded down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More Obama-era spying programs (Score:0)
    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 17, 2017 @07:18PM (#55573725)

    Thanks Democrats for voting that clown in. He took the Bush-era surveillance and expanded it by leaps and bounds. It's time we appoint a special prosecutor and investigate all of the abuses of the Obama administration.

  19. Re:But! by AHuxley · · Score: 2

    They have placed their human spies deep within the command and policy setting structures of the US and UK mil, governments.
    Why worry about "social media" when US and UK gov policy is been created by decades of well placed spies.
    Other nations don't worry about social media in the same way the USA wasted billions trying to "sway" people.
    "Social media" does not change a persons faith and what their faith will always command them to do.
    Smart nations, faiths, cults, criminals just line their spies up at UK and UK job fairs and recruiting efforts on university campuses.
    Over decades some move up to upper and middle management passing any efforts at detection by MI5, FBI.
    A polygraph investigation (the test is just color of law cover for the long term investigation) won't find a person who is not lying and has never been corrupt.
    Well placed spies then move to more trusted parts of the UK and UK mil thanks to changes in who needs to be added to the security services. Security is now second place to hiring lots of different people from all over the UK and USA with very different backgrounds. Other governments, cults, faith groups, criminal groups just line their clean, trusted spies up at jobs fairs and note who many of their best students get accepted every decade.
    In the past the US and UK really put some thought into getting trustworthy staff. Now its just about virtue signalling that all kinds of applicants are welcome.

    Social media spying is not that important for spying, other nations, cults, faiths, gangs, criminal groups have that covered with decades of their own people deep in the US, UK police, security services, special forces and mil.

    The other aspect other nations really like using US and UK social media is to find US and UK spies trying to pass as low level UK, USembassy workers in their own nations.
    The US and UK will often try and place advanced mil/university graduates with amazing "skills" in with their low ranking embassy staff.
    Other nations use years of collected and stored social media to track back over embassy workers education and work history.
    Private detectives and contractors who do complex background and reference checks will often be able to show when and how a persons social media was altered or created by US/UK clandestine services to create a fake history for a created embassy worker.
    Its hard to pass a created image of a person enjoying a party with no link to the US mil when private detectives have saved images of the same person in a different part of the USA in the mil years ago. Collect it all was low cost and a lot of early social media was saved in real time.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  20. Re: Why was this modded down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you going to be yet another constant irritant here? We already have too many.

  21. UK Parliamentary data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    UK Parliament moved their email and documents into the *Microsoft* cloud in Ireland......

    (From Snowden): CIA was/is spying on all its allies, and each day a brief on legislation was prepared for Bush (and later Obama) on who was considering what legislation. If it was bad for the USA, it could be headed off. The joke being that when allied leaders called the President he already knew the details of the legislation they were going to talk about, and already had lined up talking points and counter allies as leverage.

    So now all that cloud data is used to inform Donald Trump, his various business partners, and potentially (via the secure link Jared asked the Russians to provide) Trump's Russian friends too.

    It's quite staggering that GCHQ would permit the highest law making body in the land to put its data into a cloud they know they and NSA have access to. Exposing the law making process to known foreign surveillance. Theresa May complains of Putin's 100+ propaganda channels trying to stir up racism during the Brexit vote... yet Parliament are exposed to back channel orange.

    1. Re:UK Parliamentary data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's quite staggering that GCHQ would permit the highest law making body in the land to put its data into a cloud they know they and NSA have access to. Exposing the law making process to known foreign surveillance.

      Exposing the law making process to surveillance is not a bug, it's a feature.

    2. Re:UK Parliamentary data by chihowa · · Score: 1

      It's quite staggering that GCHQ would permit the highest law making body in the land to put its data into a cloud they know they and NSA have access to. Exposing the law making process to known foreign surveillance.

      Exposing the law making process to surveillance available to only a select few is not a bug, it's a feature .

      FTFY.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  22. Slashdot is Antisocial Media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, you have nothing to worry about by posting here.

  23. Is it legal? by Max_W · · Score: 1

    I mean collecting billions of people's private posts and leave them open online.

  24. 400 GB of samples by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    400 GB. Of mostly text files. Samples, my arse! Just say you wanted a copy of everybody's facebook. It's more honest.

  25. In other shocking news.... by DidgetMaster · · Score: 1

    ...the government was caught leaving copies of books it found in the public library in places where the public could see them! Seriously, this seems like a complete non-story if all the information in the S3 bucket was already public information. They just went out and gathered a bunch of stuff that you or I could already get by simply googling it and stored it in one place. Now if some of the information was not public already, then that is a different story...and would have been highlighted in this one if it really was the case.

  26. Factor of 10 compression? by ebyrob · · Score: 1

    GZIP is more like a factor of 3-4 times for text. The only way they could get a factor of 10 compression ratio would be if they were using something like PAQAR 4.5, which I kinda doubt...

    1. Re:Factor of 10 compression? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on the input. It could easily be a database dump with lots of redundant data for example. There is no way it was just the raw text from the posts, there would almost certainly be gobs of metadata attached to each post.

  27. Occam's Razor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a) Amazon buckets didn't always come that way, it took some pressure for Amazon to accept that this was a poor default setting.
    b) In most of these cases, it's simply incompetence - I can't get OAuth to work, let's just set it to public and hope nobody guesses the bucket name.

    Occam's razor suggests someone made a big mistake (perhaps aided and abetted by random contextual factors), although there's always the chance it's deliberately public "by accident" so that someone else can use it. As in "we're not formally allowed to give you X in exchange for Y, but if you happen to look over here..."

    That is basically how the wikileaks deal was set up, based on the evidence. (Two people walk into a room, pretend not to have done business together, and then one wikileaks damaging information about the DNC while the other tries to lift sanctions. What happened in the room?)

  28. Re:MODERATORS ARE CENSORING POSTS by HiThere · · Score: 1

    A book about the Democratic party is pretty much guaranteed to be PR, either by a party supporter or by an opponent. In neither case should it be believed. Instead watch what it does and how it acts. The same is true for the other parties.

    A Democratic event is more revealing, but attending at more than a low level event requires approval by those higher up in the party. While there are obvious reasons why this is necessary, it mitigates against trusting what you see as being an accurate mirror of the intentions of those in control. So again, watch what it does and how it acts.

    And, of course, watching means that your reports come from trustworthy sources. So don't believe what you see reported easily. Require multiple sources with differing biases.

    Have you started to notice that this is a lot of work? That's why people usually pick someone they trust to form their opinions. Too bad people are so bad at picking trustworthy people.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  29. mp.net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Neat! Do they have a copy of militaryphotos.net? Someone post a torrent please.