How the NSA collects everything you do on the internet

[TheHammer]

Oh noes. Turns out analysts deliberately broke rules. Who woulda thought this fine, upstanding organization with such effective self-policing and auditing could have let this happen?

US intelligence analysts have deliberately broken rules designed to prevent them from spying on Americans, according to an admission by the National Security Agency that undermines fresh insistences from Barack Obama on Friday that all breaches were inadvertent.

A report by the NSA's inspector general is understood to have uncovered a number of examples of analysts choosing to ignore so-called "minimisation procedures" aimed at protecting privacy, according to officials speaking to Bloomberg.

"Over the past decade, very rare instances of wilful violations of NSA's authorities have been found," the NSA confirmed in a statement to the news agency. "NSA takes very seriously allegations of misconduct, and cooperates fully with any investigations – responding as appropriate. NSA has zero tolerance for willful violations of the agency's authorities."

Though likely to be a small subset of the thousands of supposedly accidental rule breaches recently revealed by the Washington Post, these cases flatly contradict assurances given by President Obama that the NSA was only ever acting in good faith.

I await your concession, squealer.

What's funny is that you think this weakens my position, when in fact it strengthens it.

My position all along was that an audited system makes it easy to identify rougue agents, and that I wanted to see how the agency dealt with violations of its policies. I felt that the agency would come down rather harshly on those rogue agents abusing their power. Your contention has been that the auditing wouldn't make a difference, and that the agency would simply "sweep violations under the rug".

Firstly identification:
A report by the NSA's inspector general is understood to have uncovered a number of examples of analysts choosing to ignore so-called "minimisation procedures" aimed at protecting privacy, according to officials speaking to Bloomberg.

So an audit of the system uncovered instances of abuse, and was reported by the NSA inspector general's office. So much for the idea that auditing was useless and that they would "sweep any issues under the rug". The fact that you are able to come in here with this report bolsters my contention.

How violations are dealt with:
"Over the past decade, very rare instances of wilful violations of NSA's authorities have been found," the NSA confirmed in a statement to the news agency. "NSA takes very seriously allegations of misconduct, and cooperates fully with any investigations – responding as appropriate. NSA has zero tolerance for willful violations of the agency's authorities."

When someone talks about "zero tolerance", that would indicate that persons comitting these violations are at the very least no longer employed, and would be subject to prosecution depending on the specifics of the violation. I look forward to the eventual release, or leak that gives details as to what the violations were, and how they were dealt with specifically. But based on this article the ability to identify violations, and the will to punish both appear present.

One final point:

...undermines fresh insistences from Barack Obama on Friday that all breaches were inadvertent

I don't know what specific remarks that the article is drawing this inference from, but if Obama was in fact insisting that ALL breaches were inadvertent, then that was a very foolish statement to make. Misconduct is going to occur in any human institution anywhere on the planet. The larger the institution, the greater chance for misconduct. What's important is how you deal with that misconduct when it arises.

Again, if you feel any of my previous statments contradict anything I've said here feel free to quote me.

[TheHammer]

Sometimes the authority doesn't want something. This isn't necassarily an example of such a case, but in such a case the rubber stamp blocks it.

In that case you're not talking about a rubberstamp, you are talking about a puppet, which is a completely different political euphimism. A true "rubber-stamp" in the political context doesn't take an active role in deception, rather it is more a willfully ignorant figurehead.

I stand by my assertion that the reason FISA approval is so high is because the people bringing the requests know the process and what is expected by the court.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06 ... ct-request

...

But according to Timothy Edgar, a top privacy lawyer at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Security Council under Bush and Obama, it's not quite as simple as the FISC rubber stamping nearly every application the government puts in front of it.

The reason so many orders are approved, he said, is that the Justice Department office that manages the process vets the applications rigorously... So getting the order approved by the Justice Department lawyers is perhaps the biggest hurdle to approval. "The culture of that office is very reluctant to get a denial,"
he [told the Journal].

I can already hear the whine: "But what's to stop them from lieing on the requests?!?!?!?111111".

Nothing, other than the fact that they would be comitting perjury. It's the same thing that a police officer risks when he goes before a judge and asks for a search warrant.

[Gaidin]

Technicality of term doesn't really save you Hammer. They're both the same overall trope of being the authority's bitch. Though as I said, I have my doubts of the FISC being this trope as they're overall just a warrant court and not a trial court.

[Terralthra]

Note that the NSA analysts who used their access to spy on their love interests faced disciplinary action, up to termination. Not, say, prosecution for willful violation of the law[/url]. This is the essence of the surveillance state. Chelsea Manning is going to jail for half her life for exposing the government's secret crimes, while people who spied on their love interests for personal prurience had wrist-slaps.

[Metahive]

This is the essence of the surveillance state. Chelsea Manning is going to jail for half her life for exposing the government's secret crimes, while people who spied on their love interests for personal prurience had wrist-slaps.

Good luck trying to get IM Squealer to acknowledge that. Since there's no way for him to spin this into pro-government propaganda he has ignored that point whenever it came up after handwaving it as "irrelevant".

[Thanas]

What's funny is that you think this weakens my position, when in fact it strengthens it.

Only an idiot would think that, especially with that Terralthra provided.

[K. A. Pital]

My position all along was that an audited system makes it easy to identify rougue agents, and that I wanted to see how the agency dealt with violations of its policies. I felt that the agency would come down rather harshly on those rogue agents abusing their power. Your contention has been that the auditing wouldn't make a difference, and that the agency would simply "sweep violations under the rug".

And Thanas was fully correct in the light of no judicial punishment for legal violations. Even in cases where rogue behaviour has been identified subjects in question could be fired, but that's it. "Rather harshly" my ass.

[NettiWelho]

The plot thickens.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/2 ... 13247.html
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/08/25/ ... onferences

NSA Spied On The U.N.: Der Spiegel Report

BERLIN -- The German magazine Der Spiegel says the U.S. National Security Agency secretly monitored the U.N.'s internal video conferencing system by decrypting it last year.

The weekly said Sunday that documents it obtained from American leaker Edward Snowden show the NSA decoded the system at the U.N.'s headquarters in New York last summer.

Quoting leaked NSA documents, the article said the decryption "dramatically increased the data from video phone conferences and the ability to decode the data traffic."

In three weeks, Der Spiegel said, the NSA increased the number of decrypted communications at the U.N. from 12 to 458.

Snowden's leaks have exposed details of the United States' global surveillance apparatus, sparking an international debate over the limits of American spying.

[TheHammer]

And Thanas was fully correct in the light of no judicial punishment for legal violations. Even in cases where rogue behaviour has been identified subjects in question could be fired, but that's it. "Rather harshly" my ass.

Only an idiot would think that, especially with that Terralthra provided.

Note that the NSA analysts who used their access to spy on their love interests faced disciplinary action, up to termination. Not, say, prosecution for willful violation of the law. This is the essence of the surveillance state. Chelsea Manning is going to jail for half her life for exposing the government's secret crimes, while people who spied on their love interests for personal prurience had wrist-slaps.

I'll address all three of these at once. First and foremost, the article describes incidents occuring over 10 years. The estimate given was "About one a year for 10 years", obviously that is a situation that goes beyond PRISM or XKeyscore. Unfortunately there are no details given, other than the fact that they "abused their authority".

Without knowing what they did, you don't know if the technically broke the law, or if they only violated agency policies and procedures. It specifically states in the article:

"NSA said in a statement Friday that there have been “very rare” instances of willful violations of any kind in the past decade, and none have violated key surveillance laws. “NSA has zero tolerance for willful violations of the agency’s authorities” and responds “as appropriate.”

Now, whether or not you consider loss of your career to be a "slap on the wrist" (I certainly don't), if no laws were actually broken then there was nothing to prosecute. Also, to be clear, if these incidents did not involve PRISM or XKeyscore then they are outside the scope of this discussion. I'm certainly not defending everything the NSA has ever done, nor would I even try to.

[Metahive]

I like how Hämmerlein thinks that the abuse going back further somehow strengthens his point. I also like how he's still insists on there still being not "enough details" even after more and more lurid details have been revealed throughout the whole thread. I think I've figured out who Hämmerlein really is:

[K. A. Pital]

Our enemies are commiting suicide at the gates of Baghdad. Yep.

none have violated key surveillance laws

Wilful spying on people who are not suspect in anything without their consent - which is the case with NSA agents "love interests", you fucking moron, is breaking the constitutional right to privacy. Nobody gives a flying fuck about some "key surveillance laws" which the stinking fucker never even cared to list or quote so that his lying tongue could be proven wrong as it always happens. It is clear that some cases were related to Americans, who are protected from spying - supposedly, lol:

Most of the cases didn’t involve the communications of Americans, Feinstein said

So the problem with NSA wankers is that they can't even keep their hard cocks and computers separate.

This means they should not be trusted on anything they say. Keith Alexander once again publicly lied that "no one has willfully or knowingly disobeyed the law or tried to invade your civil liberties or privacy". What will he say now, when the Congress is probing these apparently "nonexistent" wilful violations?

The solution is to smash No Such Agency, to utterly obliterate their pathetic little paranoic minds and destroy their web of surveillance and lies. It is pointless to 'reform' a deeply corrupt system where top officials can lie openly with impunity, do you understand that, The Moron?

[Thanas]

It gets better. Remember the US scandal where they asked their diplomats to colled biodata at the UN? Well, turns out, all planned by the NSA.

And all in the name of preventing terrorism, hohoho.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 18625.html

Just over two weeks ago, Obama made a promise to the world. "The main thing I want to emphasize is that I don't have an interest and the people at the NSA don't have an interest in doing anything other than making sure that (...) we can prevent a terrorist attack," Obama said during a hastily arranged press conference at the White House on August 9. He said the sole purpose of the program was to "get information ahead of time (...) so we are able to carry out that critical task," adding: "We do not have an interest in doing anything other than that." Afterward, the president flew to the Atlantic island of Martha's Vineyard for his summer vacation.

Obama's appearance before the press was an attempt to morally justify the work of the intelligence agencies; to declare it as a type of emergency defense. His message was clear: Intelligence is only gathered because there is terror -- and anything that saves people's lives can't be bad. Ever since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, this logic has been the basis for a wide range of new surveillance programs.

[Admiral Valdemar]

But why shouldn't you work for the NSA?

[Thanas]

A great piece on why the Snowden leaks are so important. Link

[TheHammer]

Our enemies are commiting suicide at the gates of Baghdad. Yep.

none have violated key surveillance laws

Wilful spying on people who are not suspect in anything without their consent - which is the case with NSA agents "love interests", you fucking moron, is breaking the constitutional right to privacy. Nobody gives a flying fuck about some "key surveillance laws" which the stinking fucker never even cared to list or quote so that his lying tongue could be proven wrong as it always happens. It is clear that some cases were related to Americans, who are protected from spying - supposedly, lol:

Just because you think something should be illegal doesn't mean that it is. You have no details as to what these violations consisted of, therefore your speculation that they MUST HAVE broken laws is completely without basis. I'm sure there are numerous ways one could "willfully violate" agency procedures without technically breaking any laws.

Even if some laws were broken, you would need to specifically know which ones to determine if 1)a convication could be obtained based on legally aquired evidence. And 2) If the specifics of the violation, including specified penalties, warranted proceeding with a trial.

The bottom line is this: continuing to talk out of your ass without specific details is a waste of both of our time.

Most of the cases didn’t involve the communications of Americans, Feinstein said

So the problem with NSA wankers is that they can't even keep their hard cocks and computers separate.

You're talking aproximately 10 incidents over a 10 year period - that would hardly make this typical. Some people are going to spy on their loved ones. Some of those people will inevitably work at the NSA. It's not as though this behavior is tolerated or encouraged by the organization itself which is the real issue here.

This means they should not be trusted on anything they say. Keith Alexander once again publicly lied that "no one has willfully or knowingly disobeyed the law or tried to invade your civil liberties or privacy". What will he say now, when the Congress is probing these apparently "nonexistent" wilful violations?

I honestly don't know if Keith Alexander mis-spoke, lied, or simply wasn't ware of the violations. But it was a dumb thing to say without keeping it in a narrow context. It is absolutely foolish and unrealistic for anyone to something so broad as "no one ever" on anything like this. There is always going to be a bad apple or two in any large bunch. The only realistic expectation to have is that there are mechanisms in place for finding and removing these bad apples.

The solution is to smash No Such Agency, to utterly obliterate their pathetic little paranoic minds and destroy their web of surveillance and lies. It is pointless to 'reform' a deeply corrupt system where top officials can lie openly with impunity, do you understand that, The Moron?

Apparently you are under the impression that I just don't understand what you're trying to say. Nothing could be further from the truth. I've considered your position, weighed the merits of your arguments, and simply come to a different conclusion. Your expectations are unrealistic, your solutions are unworkable. I'm not against reforms and oversight. Thanas suggestions earlier would be things I'm in favor of. But you flailing your arms and angrily calling for the "destruction of the web of surveillance and lies" is non-productive, and thus not something worth entertaining any thoughts about.

[K. A. Pital]

What I am trying to explain here is that in a corrupt system with undue lobbying influence there are ways to make constant intrusions of privacy legal even if they were or are illegal at some point, say, now.

So if you let them continue, inevitably they will corrupt the whole government more and more (as if there weren't enough ways corruption is engulfing it as it is). Intrusions will become the norm, not the exception.

But of course, you can ignore me and think that self-policing of the government by the government is a sound policy. We'll see what happens in ten years.

[NettiWelho]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/08/31/ ... ide-botnet

U.S. intelligence services carried out 231 offensive cyber-operations in 2011, the leading edge of a clandestine campaign that embraces the Internet as a theater of spying, sabotage and war, according to top-secret documents [from Edward Snowden]. Additionally, under an extensive effort code-named GENIE, U.S. computer specialists break into foreign networks so that they can be put under surreptitious U.S. control. Budget documents say the $652 million project has placed 'covert implants,' sophisticated malware transmitted from far away, in computers, routers and firewalls on tens of thousands of machines every year, with plans to expand those numbers into the millions. ... The implants that [an NSA group called Tailored Access Operations (TAO)] creates are intended to persist through software and equipment upgrades, to copy stored data, 'harvest' communications and tunnel into other connected networks. This year TAO is working on implants that “can identify select voice conversations of interest within a target network and exfiltrate select cuts,” or excerpts, according to one budget document. In some cases, a single compromised device opens the door to hundreds or thousands of others.

The documents provided by Snowden and interviews with former U.S. officials describe a campaign of computer intrusions that is far broader and more aggressive than previously understood. The Obama administration treats all such cyber-operations as clandestine and declines to acknowledge them.

I'm guessing the 'clandestine & decline to acknowledge'-part comes from the fact that these are extraditable offenses for which US themselves have jailed foreigners who have never stepped on US soil...

[cosmicalstorm]

NRA has joined ACLU in the legal battle against NSA

[NoXion]

A link would have been nice.

[Admiral Valdemar]

And for our next trick: compromising the web.

[bilateralrope]

Just in case there is anyone here who thinks the NSA is competent at fighting terrorism: NSA war room modelled after Star Trek

NSA director Keith Alexander might be the most famous spy in America right now.

Everyone wants to know who's really behind the agency's widespread snooping. And now a lengthy profile of Alexander in Foreign Policy invites even more intrigue.

It also reveals some of the general's weird ways.

The core questions raised about Alexander the "cowboy" in the FP story stem from revelations in Edward Snowden's leak of confidential NSA documents earlier this summer. "Cowboy" doesn't quite cut it, though. Alexander sounds a bit more eccentric than that:

"When he was running the Army's Intelligence and Security Command, Alexander brought many of his future allies down to Fort Belvoir for a tour of his base of operations, a facility known as the Information Dominance Center," a retired officer in charge of VIP visits said.

"It had been designed by a Hollywood set designer to mimic the bridge of the starship Enterprise from Star Trek, complete with chrome panels, computer stations, a huge TV monitor on the forward wall, and doors that made a "whoosh" sound when they slid open and closed.

"Lawmakers and other important officials took turns sitting in a leather "captain's chair" in the center of the room and watched as Alexander, a lover of science-fiction movies, showed off his data tools on the big screen.

"Everybody wanted to sit in the chair at least once to pretend he was Jean-Luc Picard."

Well that's odd, but it doesn't explain his decisions as NSA director.

Why, for instance, did Alexander expand the NSA's purview with programs like PRISM that flirted with the line between what's legal and what's not?

The general did it because he believed that big data and technology could protect the nation. That's not such a bad thing to believe in!

However, sometimes Alexander's approach can be very misleading. For example:

"He had all these diagrams showing how this guy was connected to that guy and to that guy," said a former NSA official who heard Alexander give briefings on the floor of the Information Dominance Center.

"Some of my colleagues and I were sceptical. Later, we had a chance to review the information. It turns out that all [that] those guys were connected to were pizza shops."
Ad Feedback

Another official remembered a chart that Alexander had drawn up to identify all of the terrorists in Afghanistan. When they checked the research, they found no evidence of terrorist activity and discovered that a quarter of the targets on Alexander's list were already dead.

Well hey, even powerful people make mistakes. Surely, Alexander surrounded himself with level-headed folks who can give him a good gut check every now and then. You'd think that his most trusted lieutenant, James Heath, would be the one. But no. Heath is kind of crazy:

"Several former intelligence officials who worked with Heath described him as Alexander's 'mad scientist.' Another called him the NSA director's 'evil genius'," a former intelligence official said.

"For years, Heath, a brilliant but abrasive technologist, has been in charge of making Alexander's most ambitious ideas a reality; many of the controversial data-mining tools that Alexander wanted to use against the NSA's raw intelligence were developed by Heath, for example.

"He's smart, crazy, and dangerous. He'll push the technology to the limits to get it to do what he wants."

So the director of the NSA is a trekkie?

And his right hand man is an 'evil genius'?

And that replica of the Enterprise bridge was built with taxpayer dollars? OK then.

If you're still curious about Keith Alexander, check out the Alexander profile in full. Spoiler: The general's favourite iPhone game is Bejeweled Blits.

I doubt that hiring a hollywood designer would have been cheap. But at least that doesn't show incompetence, unlike the diagrams Alexander used to show off how useful the information gathering was.