Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C|Net)   NSA chief hints at ISP and email wiretapping. If you haven't curled up into a ball and renounced your religion because there is no god yet, now may be a good time   (news.cnet.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, ISP, NSA, Julian Sanchez, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Patriot Act, Fort Meade, warrantless wiretapping, Internet Protocol  
•       •       •

7368 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Jun 2013 at 9:30 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



386 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-13 10:15:01 AM  

jake_lex: uber humper: Skleenar: YixilTesiphon: What is the difference between this and the government reading all of your mail? It's magically different because it's on the internet?

Well, not to take the bait, but what they are discussing here isn't like reading your mail, it's more like reading the address of the recipient, the address of the sender, the time the message was sent and when it was delivered.

They are careful to differentiate between the metadata and the content.  Whether or not this nicety is actually being observed in practice is probably important, but so far these revelations seem to indicate that what is being collected is metadata, which is then likely being used to identify content of interest which is then FISA'd.  (And, I would guess, probably automatically, without human intervention).


And this is what you will believe until the government tells you to believe differently?

This kind of captures how I feel about this whole thing: if the program works as the NSA says it does, I don't have such a problem with it. And I can see how it would be useful and good in capturing terrorists. But how can we be sure that we are being told the truth of what this program is and does?


If the program were being run by computer engineers who I would expect to have demonstrable knowledge of what is and is not metadata, rather than simply being designed by some engineers and managed by NSA, and they actually had some kind of public liability I might assume they're playing by their own rules.  Unfortunately, neither of these are true. As with any self-righteous over-zealous organization goes, as soon as they find something interesting the line between meta-data and data suddenly disappears and they're reading your e-mail.

On the bright side, the amount of anti-government e-mails that have been sent around since Obama took office now feel more like karmic payback to big brother than blissful ignorance.  Good luck shifting through the shiat Americans send out these days.
 
TWX
2013-06-13 10:15:20 AM  

LarryDan43: Lexx: Isn't this just confirming what we long, long figured was the reality of the world, but never had to consciously confirm & acknowledge?

To be honest, I'm less concerned about how the government uses my personal data in this day & age (admittedly, the communist witch-hunts of Joe McCarthy's era were bad) and much, much more concerned about my personal data being freely available to the corporate sector & my fellow man.

We at GEICO have noticed your drive to work is much further than what you claimed on your policy. Also you speed through construction zones. We will be raising your premium.


And that in part is why I'm glad that my vehicles aren't OBD-II compliant...

/why does it cost $27.50 to go through the OBD-II emissions test where they just hook up to the computer,
//but $20 to put the vehicle on the emissions dyno, hook up the hoses, and do a particulates count?
 
2013-06-13 10:16:00 AM  
How about this. If all they can do is tell us that this multi billion dollar endeavor MIGHT HAVE prevented ONE bombing in NYC. And it means that all of our communications needs to be shifted and stored and analyzed etc etc

Then there is no argument that it is a HUGE WASTE OF MONEY. So regardless of right or wrong it is a massive expense that hasn't shown itself to be beneficial to the budget and has a huge negative effect on the privacy and rights of the very people it is supposed to be protecting.

The only reason we feel obligated to spend this kind of money is a direct result of our foreign policy. We need to start having real discussions about where we as americans see ourselves in the world and our defense budgets.
 
2013-06-13 10:16:39 AM  
"For months, Washington has been accusing China of cyberespionage, but it turns out that the biggest threat to the pursuit of individual freedom and privacy in the US is the unbridled power of the government," Li Haidong, a researcher of American studies at China Foreign Affairs University, told the newspaper.
 
2013-06-13 10:18:40 AM  
Nina_Hartley's_Ass
Settle down, subby. Everyone knows you're looking at porn. Nobody cares.

...until you run for political office on a platform that threatens powerful interests, or lead a social change movement, or...
 
2013-06-13 10:19:43 AM  

unlikely: Again, we've known this since like the 90s... why is it only just NOW a big deal?


I had no idea of the extent to which the government was into the records and data of normal citizens, you know, with no connection whatsoever to any sort of terrorist activity.

If you knew in the '90s you should have made people aware. I put this on you.
 
2013-06-13 10:22:08 AM  
If they have the ability to actually find out the true identity of senders of emails can we, just maybe, use this to shut down all the people trying to sell me Vi@gr@ and other spam.  If the NSA cannot do this one reach around, they should stop.
 
2013-06-13 10:22:11 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: I still don't understand how NOW it's an issue when this shiat was leaked back in 2006 when they were setting up data capture rooms in the various ISP fiber backbone hubs?

Can anyone explain why now we're outraged when we weren't then?


We were.

I remember people telling me that the Democract presidential candidate was against that sort of thing, even after he voted for the bill to exempt the phone companies from liability.  I knew he was a scumbag like the then current president, and I knew he would drop any pretenses about caring for civil liberties if he was elected.

I've yet to be disappointed, and I can't see how a McCain/Palin or Romney/Ryan presidency would have been any different.
 
2013-06-13 10:26:03 AM  

Deneb81: Is this 'wiretapping' any more invasive than the data ISPs and email services ALREADY pull from your email?


This is a bullshiat train of argument.  I can choose not to deal with google, but I can't choose not to have the government secretly compelling every provider to hand over data that might involve me.

Google can't imprison me, 'drone' me, etc.

How do feel about embracing and expanding  Prima Nocta?  I mean since a woman already has sex with her boyfriend, is it really any different to demand that she have sex with cop, Senator, soldier?  What's the difference, right?
 
2013-06-13 10:28:05 AM  
i think it's fair to say they don't give a shiat about pr0n

what do they care about? terrorism, obviously. child pr0n? drug lords?

presumably they're unlikely to tell us, because then people would know and take steps etc etc
 
2013-06-13 10:28:22 AM  
I just did a GIS. How is there not a "Ceiling Obama is watching you masturbate" pic yet? How is that even possible that not one person has put that out there?
 
2013-06-13 10:28:29 AM  

Skleenar: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: And you don't think if 60 years ago the post office had logged every letter so that they could establish patterns of who was talking to "known Communists," that would have constituted a violation of privacy?

Really, I'd be interested to hear your answer

How about establishing a pattern of who was embezzling or money laundering or working with the Mafia?  I mean, why did you use an example of something that was not a crime, if other than to somehow imply that I am somehow in favor of using this data for political intimidation?

Look, obviously this stuff can be abused.  But just about any power the Government has can be abused.  I don't think the mere fact that something can be abused is evidence that it IS being abused.

Just for the record, I would be surprised if the NSA isn't taking liberties in what they collect and how they do it.  I'm merely making the point that so far the revelations have been about metadata.

I also believe that metadata collection could be abused, too.  It's not some magic talisman that makes it all OK.


That's right. If they collect all the meta data from everyone, then you are only one sorting/data entry error away from someone who is in regular contact with terrorist/criminal organisations. Hello no-fly list and goodbye credit.
 
2013-06-13 10:28:39 AM  

Pants full of macaroni!!: /this q&d pic is going to get quite a workout before the government [REDACTED BY [REDACTED]] me


Fixed that for [REDACTED].
 
2013-06-13 10:30:02 AM  
Can't you all see how overblown this is? All of this anger against a program that's saving American lives, just because you're concerned over privacy? Everyone one of you ungrateful sops bellowing about how the NSA is violating the 4th Amendment should be shaking our hand for all of the terrorist attacks we have saved you from using all of this metadata. Would you rather be blown up by suicide bomber?

I can assure you that we're only looking at the information we need to protect you. Sure, along the way we may inadvertently see some unrelated info, like Skleenar's Natalie Portman fanpage or Nekom's love for erotic bonsai. Just because we know that Pants full of macaroni!! once ate 27 Encharitos and threw up on a cop doesn't mean we're violating the constitution. And of course, all of that intel on Nana's Vibrator's "experimental" phase in college and neversubmit's closely guarded Elvis collector's plate collection was key in foiling 9/11 2 (which would have been far worse than regular 9/11, trust me.)

This is very important work that you just wouldn't understand. Even though we stumbled upon  Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich's frankly frightening browser history or unlikely's LiveJournal of Scooby Doo/Species crossover fanfiction, not to mention Drew's collection of vegetarian chili recipes (the white vegan chili is to DIE for), you have nothing to worry about. Your privacy is our biggest concern.

I promise.
 
2013-06-13 10:30:08 AM  

mrexcess: Nina_Hartley's_Ass
Settle down, subby. Everyone knows you're looking at porn. Nobody cares.

...until you run for political office on a platform that threatens powerful interests, or lead a social change movement, or...


Don't be silly. Politicians don't look at porn.
 
2013-06-13 10:30:29 AM  
You can also thank companies like Cisco, for specifically building hardware and software designed for governments(ours and others) to spy and control the internet.(obviously, it's just a tangent on what their hardware and software already does).

You know, all those stories about X nation locking down their internet, and Y nation spying and z nation blacking out twitter, etc. The big router co.'s made mad bank developing and creating the hardware and software that allows the NSA to do this kind of thing. Big news, for several years about it. And it all went to /dev/null as far as people caring.
 
2013-06-13 10:31:05 AM  
Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.) said lawmakers learned "significantly more" about the spy programs at the National Security Agency (NSA) during a briefing on Tuesday with counterterrorism officials.
"What we learned in there," Sanchez said, "is significantly more than what is out in the media today."

"I think it's just broader than most people even realize, and I think that's, in one way, what astounded most of us, too," Sanchez said of the briefing.


http://thehill.com/video/house/305047-dem-rep-lawmakers-learned-sign if icantly-more-about-surveillance-programs-in-nsa-briefing
 
2013-06-13 10:31:11 AM  

pedrop357: I've yet to be disappointed, and I can't see how a McCain/Palin or Romney/Ryan presidency would have been any different.


Well with the former we would have had some great years at SNL and the latter would have made sure you grandma would be eating catfood
 
2013-06-13 10:31:32 AM  

doglover: I've just always assumed the Feds read ALL my emails.


Yup.

It's like sending a postcard through snail mail.  Anyone that handles it along the way can read it.
 
2013-06-13 10:31:42 AM  
Don't give up your religion...just belong to the correct one!
 
2013-06-13 10:32:25 AM  
Deneb81: We'll see what the courts think of these programs. Maybe, if they have the balls to take a case.

As for not giving things to other people of you want them to remain private, why doesn't that apply to postal mail? Oh, right, because when the nation was founded that service existed and so there was no way for legislators and courts to devise bizarre and bogus Fourth Amendment interpretations that denied privacy for that. They tried that trick with phones but eventually enough powerful people were hoist on their own petard that they even extended protections to telephone voice transmissions. Somehow, though, although a Skype call is functionally identical if not technically architected the same way, that doesn't count.

It's time we, the people stopped passively accepting all the shenanigans and demanded that our rights be respected and protected, not grudgingly doled out after massive fights with the very people whose job it is to protect them.
 
2013-06-13 10:32:46 AM  
Since they're probably reading this too, I'll just say the NSA has fart-breath.
 
2013-06-13 10:33:06 AM  
I for one was quite outraged back during the Clinton/Bush era when Carnivore was all the rage in snooping scandals.  But people thought I should put on a tinfoil hat b/c I didn't like the idea of the government being able to pull anything they wanted off the internet.  Now that it's a scandal, it's kind of vindicating and I'm relieved that there's a tiny national dialogue, but really, my reaction is more like "Oh, sure, now we're unhappy with it?"
 
2013-06-13 10:33:23 AM  

Point02GPA: Every once in a while a 50-60 yo undelivered letter/postcard appears. I wonder what the oldest undelivered email will contain?


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-06-13 10:38:28 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: YixilTesiphon: A secret court is no better than no court.

In what way is a court that has a denial rate of basically 0 better than no court? It lends an air of undeserved legality to the shame proceedings.


While this might not make you feel better, there is a good reason.  It has nothing to do with protecting you - it has to do with protecting the people in charge, and the people who do the data collection.

How does it protect them?  The guys up top get to say there were multiple people who signed off that the target was "legitimate" and that the reasons for considering such a target was not "because I feel like it" or "I want dirt for a campaign ad".  This protects the people doing the collection as well - there was a process followed and someone up above said "You have a good reason".

The only part that really isn't sufficiently transparent is validating the rules used to give a thumbs up or thumbs down.  In theory there is congressional oversight - you saw how fast the ranking members were saying "Yes, we knew, nothing to see here".  In practice...  we can't really be sure since the records aren't open to public scrutiny.  And they aren't open for good reasons.

So we get some poor schlub in a top intelligence position basically being put in a situation where he's required to lie, and then he'll be called out on it.  He is supposed to keep our capabilities "secret" from the badguys.  And we all know that how "secret" something is relates to the inverse square of the number of people who know it.  There's several thousand people in the US that were involved in constructing and deploying the monitoring capabilities.  There are probably another 50,000 who can figure out how to do this if they were motivated even a little.  So he gets away with not looking like a fool until some savant below him who doesn't understand what the hell is really going on starts screaming "He's a fool!  The emperor has no clothes!".  As numerous people have been saying - this hasn't been a secret.

Now let us hope that congress is smart enough to recognize that the sound and fury coming from the Internet amplifier needs to be squelched and ignored.  Doing this in an open "visible to all" manner is not viable - suspicion would be conviction.  "We think so and so might be a terrorist" and ITG-asshat goes and harasses said subject of investigation.  That would be a violation of someone's pursuit of happiness.  And killing the secret court isn't a solution either - we want the NSA doing sigint and having that chance of finding the group that puts a dirty bomb in Chicago.  Just because some get through (Boston) is not a good reason to stop - it's a reason to figure out why we were sleeping again (If the FSB is saying "Watch this guy" some alarm should have gone off somewhere).  And we want some trail on what was done - getting rid of the secret court would just eliminate the oversight, not the actions.  That's not a good idea either.

So everyone put on your big girl panties and grow up a bit.  You can't "trust no one".  If you want something kept private - take steps to keep in private.  But recognize this - the Internet is a public place.  Just because nobody is in the room with you while you surf doesn't mean you are not in public.  Be happy it doesn't have the same expected behavior patterns that say going to a Southern Baptist church or even your local public park has.  But just like we don't want zero police presence on the highways, we also do not want zero watchers of what is happening on the 'Net.
 
2013-06-13 10:39:00 AM  

unlikely: Again, we've known this since like the 90s... why is it only just NOW a big deal?


It was a big deal back then, too.  You just weren't paying attention.
 
2013-06-13 10:39:04 AM  
Screw it. Everyone with a phone, or email, anything that can be tapped needs to use all of the keywords that triggers the NSA to investigate. Hundreds of millions of instances of those words showing up daily and the NSA wouldn't know where to begin or have the manpower to investigate.
 
2013-06-13 10:40:02 AM  
"I don't want to make a mistake" and reveal too much, Alexander said,

Yeah it sucks when people learn information you want to keep private.
 
2013-06-13 10:41:13 AM  
The Feds are listening to my phone calls:
"The warranty on your vehicle is about to lapse."
"My vehicle is from the 1980s, and I bought it two years ago."
"Oh, our program can't help you."
"I know."
 
2013-06-13 10:41:33 AM  

Skleenar: Well, not to take the bait, but what they are discussing here isn't like reading your mail, it's more like reading the address of the recipient, the address of the sender, the time the message was sent and when it was delivered.


Well, not to take the bait, but how does that enable them to stop or disrupt attacks?
 
2013-06-13 10:42:07 AM  

mrexcess: Deneb81: We'll see what the courts think of these programs. Maybe, if they have the balls to take a case.

As for not giving things to other people of you want them to remain private, why doesn't that apply to postal mail? Oh, right, because when the nation was founded that service existed and so there was no way for legislators and courts to devise bizarre and bogus Fourth Amendment interpretations that denied privacy for that. They tried that trick with phones but eventually enough powerful people were hoist on their own petard that they even extended protections to telephone voice transmissions. Somehow, though, although a Skype call is functionally identical if not technically architected the same way, that doesn't count.

It's time we, the people stopped passively accepting all the shenanigans and demanded that our rights be respected and protected, not grudgingly doled out after massive fights with the very people whose job it is to protect them.


I suspect that unless those demands come hand in hand with large sums of campaign contributions and kickbacks, they're going to be met with smiles, nods, and not an ounce of change.
 
2013-06-13 10:42:21 AM  
What everyone knew anyway right? Google was saying the other day we don't give the gov backdoor access. Well no kidding they just grab everything before it gets to you or as it leaves you. Now we all give the gov backdoor access, and they don't even spit on it.
 
2013-06-13 10:43:03 AM  
A secret interpretation of the Patriot Act

A secret interpretation of the Patriot Act

A secret interpretation of the Patriot Act

A secret interpretation of the Patriot Act
 
2013-06-13 10:43:28 AM  
It's kind of nice that this shiat (which has been going on since 9/11) is getting press now, during a democratic administration, because then maybe some folks on the right will start seeing this as a problem.

On the other hand, a decent number of folks on the left don't see it as a huge deal, precisely because we have a dem president.  It's sad, really, how tribal our politics have become - particularly where our two major political parties (for all their differences) are centrist in practice, whose ideology is less important than the campaign donors and special interests they are beholden to.
 
2013-06-13 10:43:28 AM  
Not to sound paranoid (since clearly I am not, since I was right...) but I had always assumed my phone/e-mails/txts/etc. was never secure and could be monitored at any time.

This is why I always told people never to say anything illegal or admit to doing anything illegal on devices or the internet.

/and people thought I was being overly paranoid... Mmmmhmm
 
2013-06-13 10:45:03 AM  

Katolu: Screw it. Everyone with a phone, or email, anything that can be tapped needs to use all of the keywords that triggers the NSA to investigate. Hundreds of millions of instances of those words showing up daily and the NSA wouldn't know where to begin or have the manpower to investigate.


This. We need a fw:fw:fw:fw:fw: email with the list of word triggers in it, get that email to your average Rushbo fan and every granny and neocon uncle this side of the Pacific will be triggering it.
 
2013-06-13 10:45:38 AM  
Nina_Hartley's_Ass
Don't be silly. Politicians don't look at porn.

Sure. And political activists don't have mistresses. And environmental lawyers don't have tax problems. And investigative journalists don't always travel down the same long, dark, unpopulated stretch of road at almost exactly 10:59 PM each evening...
 
2013-06-13 10:45:59 AM  
s23.postimg.org
tinypic.com
www.politifake.org
 
2013-06-13 10:46:26 AM  

Thunderpipes: What did Bush do, Exactly?


Well, for one, the revelation was made that the NSA was spying domestically, which before Bush was putatively not done (at least not without a warrant) and that Bush was circumventing the FISA court to avoid getting warrants for the spying he was doing.

A lot of this program was ex-post-facto legalized, and voila, the system and program that Obama has inherited is, supposedly, now legal.
 
2013-06-13 10:46:32 AM  
NSA admitted today that it has been tapping that.

It blamed the problem on horny Farkers who work in the secret covert site known only by its code name, "Your Mother's Basement" (YMB).

It says that the secret spying was not authorized personally by Obama and that is is not his fault, but nobody but fiberals and Demoncrats believe this.
 
2013-06-13 10:46:54 AM  
I'm reminded of Joseph Conrad's "The Secret Agent"
 
2013-06-13 10:47:35 AM  
I'm not concerned. After all the government is so poorly run, that it couldn't find it's own backside with a map. How's it going to find me?

/Where my Neocons at?
//Hold you rights in the air! Waive them like you just don't care!
 
2013-06-13 10:48:17 AM  
Thunderpipes:What did Bush do, Exactly?

A sh*tload of blow and whatever he was told.  Heil Prescott.
 
ows
2013-06-13 10:48:23 AM  
Obama:

"I think we've reached a good balance here."

translation: shut up and deal with it.
 
2013-06-13 10:48:53 AM  
I am going to forward all my spam to them... you know for safety.
 
2013-06-13 10:50:05 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: I still don't understand how NOW it's an issue when this shiat was leaked back in 2006 when they were setting up data capture rooms in the various ISP fiber backbone hubs?

Can anyone explain why now we're outraged when we weren't then?


The people who cared about it and biatched about it back then were dismissed as paranoid freaks.
 
2013-06-13 10:50:44 AM  

unlikely: Again, we've known this since like the 90s... why is it only just NOW a big deal?


This is kind of a Delta Green thing:  Back in the 90s we were all worried about secret conspiracies about how black helicopters were watching you and how someone might be reading your mail.  Maybe tapping your phone.  The fear was that secret and shadowy forces were conspiring to figure out your shiat.  Maybe your shiat was crazy religion, or drugs, or maybe just porn, but the currents were moving.

Now the horror is that all that stuff, and a good deal more, have gone totally legit.  They are operating out in the open.  At least with the old conspiracy model there was the hope that if someone shone a light on their perfidy, it would be blown apart.  Now, it's like pointing out the Starbucks on the corner.  It is just part of the landscape, and it isn't going anywhere.

/Choose another night at the opera
//Choose a 9mm retirement plan
///Choose Delta Green
 
ows
2013-06-13 10:50:49 AM  
can I still google myself?
 
2013-06-13 10:51:29 AM  

YixilTesiphon: What is the difference between this and the government reading all of your mail? It's magically different because it's on the internet?


We live in public!   Or some bullshiat like that,

"If I'm going to use my telescreen, I have to assume that Big Brother is watching me.   No biggie, really."
 
2013-06-13 10:51:50 AM  
When the book; The Rise and Fall of the Fourth Reich comes out in 30 years, you can point to excerpts and tell your grandkids "I was there".  And that's about it.
 
Displayed 50 of 386 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report