2 ms·

The interesting thing in retrospect is that the pro-crypto faction seems to have won. These days anyone that actually needs cryto can get it and use it. The amo

The interesting thing in retrospect is that the pro-crypto faction seems to have won. These days anyone that actually needs cryto can get it and use it. The amount of useful intelligence that a government can get from passive monitoring is constantly decreasing. Entities like the NSA have to concentrate on stuff like meta-data as they can be sure that most of the interesting content is unavailable to them. Signals intelligence is quickly becoming technologically obsolete. So the situation that the Clipper chip supporters feared back in the day has become real. It would be really good if the NSAs of the world would just accept this and stop doing evil in their desperate attempt to survive.

Jtsummers 11y ago
The NSA also focused on meta-data because it was more likely to survive a legal challenge. A law enforcement observer can make note of you entering and leaving a building at certain times. Your entrance and exit is public. What they can't do, without warrants (legally, not speaking to technical ability), is observe what happens inside a private place or within (what's intended to be) private communications. Meta-data also bypasses codes, as you point out, by revealing the network of communication (who-with-who, when, and how often). So whether the communication/interaction is recorded and understandable or not becomes less important. In the case that it is recorded and understandable, excellent, even more intel. If it's not, they still have some material to work with.
- felipeerias 11y ago
  The focus on bulk collection of metadata is based on the assumption that it can be used to stop terrorists and other enemies. This assumption remains unproven. American drones routinely murder people abroad purely because of their metadata, and yet peace is nowhere nearer. At home, it turns out that it is pretty much impossible to stop a handful of people who have access to weapons, want to do as much damage as possible, and don't fear death. Increasing the surveillance on regular citizens will not change that.
- __jal 11y ago
  I think you are confusing military and civil intelligence, which is not terribly surprising, because they are increasingly being blurred, but it it important to keep in mind. The NSA, at least on the margin, does not care about convictions. Their mandate has nothing to do with law enforcement. You're right that metadata is often much more operationally important than the message. But the DEA-style parallel-construction corruption is a hobby business for the NSA.
StavrosK 11y ago
Do you have a source on those claims? It seems to me that the opposite is true.

Jtsummers 11y ago

The NSA also focused on meta-data because it was more likely to survive a legal challenge. A law enforcement observer can make note of you entering and leaving a building at certain times. Your entrance and exit is public. What they can't do, without warrants (legally, not speaking to technical ability), is observe what happens inside a private place or within (what's intended to be) private communications. Meta-data also bypasses codes, as you point out, by revealing the network of communication (who-with-who, when, and how often). So whether the communication/interaction is recorded and understandable or not becomes less important. In the case that it is recorded and understandable, excellent, even more intel. If it's not, they still have some material to work with.

felipeerias 11y ago
The focus on bulk collection of metadata is based on the assumption that it can be used to stop terrorists and other enemies. This assumption remains unproven. American drones routinely murder people abroad purely because of their metadata, and yet peace is nowhere nearer. At home, it turns out that it is pretty much impossible to stop a handful of people who have access to weapons, want to do as much damage as possible, and don't fear death. Increasing the surveillance on regular citizens will not change that.
__jal 11y ago
I think you are confusing military and civil intelligence, which is not terribly surprising, because they are increasingly being blurred, but it it important to keep in mind. The NSA, at least on the margin, does not care about convictions. Their mandate has nothing to do with law enforcement. You're right that metadata is often much more operationally important than the message. But the DEA-style parallel-construction corruption is a hobby business for the NSA.

StavrosK 11y ago

Do you have a source on those claims? It seems to me that the opposite is true.